Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Cephalosporins periprostatic injection: are really effective on infections following prostate biopsy?

  • Urology – Original Paper
  • Published:
International Urology and Nephrology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

To compare the antibiotic prophylaxis based on quinolone administered orally with a combination of cephalosporin administered periprostatically and a fluoroquinolone orally, in terms of post-prostate bioptic infectious complication rates in those men undergoing transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy (TRUS gpb).

Methods

In a prospective, randomized, double-blind study, 150 consecutive patients were randomized to receive 10 ml lidocaine 1 % in Group A and ceftriaxone 1 g diluted in a solution of 10 ml of lidocaine 1 % in Group B, before TRUS gpb. All signed the informed consent. The men were asked to grade the pain using a ten points visual analogue scale close after TRUS gpb. In a telephone interview at 3 and 6 days, they were asked about early and late complications, assessing rectal bleeding, urinary retection, fewer, haematuria, urethral bleeding and hematospermia.

Results

Of the 150 men enrolled, 135, 70 in Groups A and 65 in Group B, completed the study. Four men (5.7 %) in Group A developed sepsis after TRUS gpb requiring hospital admission and intravenous antibiotic treatment, while none in Group B. Escherichia coli was the only organism isolated. The mean pain score was 2.76 ± 1.69 and 1.73 ± 1.26 for Group A and B, respectively (p = 0.08). Complications, evaluated at 3 and 6 days after the procedure through a telephone interview, were similar in both Groups.

Conclusions

The antibiotic prophylaxis based on the combination of ceftriaxone administered periprostatically and ciprofloxacin orally is able to offer a best control on infections caused by fluoroquinolone-resistant E. coli.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Mottet N, Bellmunt J, Bolla M, Joniau S, Mason M, Matveev V, Schmid HP, Van der Kwast T, Wiegel T, Zattoni F, Heidenreich A (2011) EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. Part II: treatment of advanced, relapsing, and castration-resistant prostate cancer. Eur Urol 59:572–583

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Reis LO, Reinato JA, Silva DC, Matheus WE, Denardi F, Ferreira U (2010) The impact of core biopsy fragmentation in prostate cancer. Int Urol Nephrol 42:965–969

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Lawrentschuk N, Daljeet N, Ma C, Hersey K, Zlotta A, Fleshner N (2011) Prostate-specific antigen test result interpretation when combined with risk factors for recommendation of biopsy: a survey of urologist’s practice patterns. Int Urol Nephrol 43:31–37

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Seçkiner I, Sen H, Erturhan S, Yağcı F (2011) A Prospective, randomized controlled study comparing lidocaine and tramadol in periprostatic nerve blockage for transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy. Urology [Epub ahead of print]

  5. Pendleton J, Costa J, Wludyka P, Carvin DM, Rosser CJ (2006) Combination of oral tramadol, acetaminophen and 1% lidocaine induced periprostatic nerve block for pain control during transrectal ultrasound guided biopsy of the prostate: a prospective, randomized, controlled trial. J Urol 176:1372–1375

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Berger AP, Frauscher F, Halpern EJ, Spranger R, Steiner H, Bartsch G, Horninger W (2003) Periprostatic administration of local anesthesia during transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy of the prostate: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Urology 61:585–588

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Yun TJ, Lee HJ, Kim SH, Lee SE, Cho JY, Seong CK (2007) Does the intrarectal instillation of lidocaine gel before periprostatic neurovascular bundle block during transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsies improve analgesic efficacy? A prospective, randomized trial. J Urol 178:103–106

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Rodriguez A, Kyriakou G, Leray E, Lobel B, Guillé F (2003) Prospective study comparing two methods of anaesthesia for prostate biopsies: apex periprostatic nerve block versus intrarectal lidocaine gel: review of the literature. Eur Urol 44:195–200

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Lee HY, Lee HJ, Byun SS, Lee SE, Hong SK, Kim SH (2007) Effect of intraprostatic local anesthesia during transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy: comparison of 3 methods in a randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled trial. J Urol 178:469–472

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Tiong HY, Liew LC, Samuel M, Consigliere D, Esuvaranathan K (2007) A meta-analysis of local anesthesia for transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy of the prostate. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 10:127–136

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Giannarini G, Autorino R, Valent F, Mogorovich A, Manassero F, De Maria M, Morelli G, Barbone F, Di Lorenzo G, Selli C (2009) Combination of perianal-intrarectal lidocaine-prilocaine cream and periprostatic nerve block for pain control during transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy: a randomized, controlled trial. J Urol 181:585–591 (discussion 591–593)

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Raber M, Scattoni V, Roscigno M, Rigatti P, Montorsi F (2005) Perianal and intrarectal anaesthesia for transrectal biopsy of the prostate: a prospective randomized study comparing lidocaine-prilocaine cream and placebo. BJU Int 96:1264–1267

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Ouzzane A, Coloby P, Mignard JP, Allegre JP, Soulie M, Rebillard X, Salomon L, Villers A; Committee of Infectious Diseases of the French Association of Urology (CIAFU); Committee of Cancerology of the French Association of Urology (CCAFU) (2011) Recommendations for best practice for prostate biopsy. Prog Urol 21:18–28

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Zaytoun OM, Vargo EH, Rajan R et al (2011) Emergence of fluoroquinolone-resistant Escherichia coli as cause of postprostate biopsy infection: implications for prophylaxis and treatment. Urology 77:1035–1041

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Grabe M, Bjerklund-Johansen TE, Botto H, Wullt B, Çek M, Naber KG, Pickard RS, Tenke P, Wagenlehner F (2011) Guidelines on urological infections, European Association of Urology Guidelines 2011

  16. Kandirali E, Ulukaradag E, Uysal B, Serin E, Semercioz A, Metin A (2009) Is only perianal anesthesia with lidocaine-prilocaine cream sufficient to decrease the pain during transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy? A prospective randomized study. Urol Int 82:262–265

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Hergan L, Kashefi C, Parsons JK (2007) Local anesthetic reduces pain associated with transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy: a meta-analysis. Urology 69:520–525

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Skriapas K, Konstantinidis C, Samarinas M, Xanthis S, Gekas A (2011) Comparison between lidocaine and glyceryl trinitrate ointment for perianal-intrarectal local anesthesia before transrectal ultrasonography-guided prostate biopsy: a placebo-controlled trial. Urology 77:905–908

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Hori S, Sengupta A, Joannides A, Balogun-Ojuri B, Tilley R, McLoughlin J (2010) Changing antibiotic prophylaxis for transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsies: are we putting our patients at risk? BJU Int 106:1298–1302

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Batura D, Rao GG, Nielsen PB (2010) Prevalence of antimicrobial resistance in intestinal flora of patients undergoing prostatic biopsy: implications for prophylaxis and treatment of infections after biopsy. BJU Int 106:1017–1020

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Batura D, Rao GG, Bo Nielsen P, Charlett A (2011) Adding amikacin to fluoroquinolone-based antimicrobial prophylaxis reduces prostate biopsy infection rates. BJU Int 107:760–764

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Feliciano J, Teper E, Ferrandino M, Macchia RJ, Blank W, Grunberger I, Colon I (2008) The incidence of fluoroquinolone resistant infections after prostate biopsy–are fluoroquinolones still effective prophylaxis? J Urol 179:952–955

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Lange D, Zappavigna C, Hamidizadeh R, Goldenberg SL, Paterson RF, Chew BH (2009) Bacterial sepsis after prostate biopsy–a new perspective. Urology 74:1200–1205

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Young JL, Liss MA, Szabo RJ (2009) Sepsis due to fluoroquinolone-resistant Escherichia coli after transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate needle biopsy. Urology 74:332–338

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Miura T, Tanaka K, Shigemura K, Nakano Y, Takenaka A, Fujisawa M (2008) Levofloxacin resistant Escherichia coli sepsis following an ultrasound-guided transrectal prostate biopsy: report of four cases and review of the literature. Int J Urol 15:457–459

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interests.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. San Donato Milanese Hospital, Morandi Street, San Donato Milanese, Milan, Italy

    Gianna Pace, Luca Carmignani, Carlo Marenghi, Gabriella Mombelli & Giorgio Bozzini

Authors
  1. Gianna Pace
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Luca Carmignani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Carlo Marenghi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Gabriella Mombelli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Giorgio Bozzini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gianna Pace.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Pace, G., Carmignani, L., Marenghi, C. et al. Cephalosporins periprostatic injection: are really effective on infections following prostate biopsy?. Int Urol Nephrol 44, 1065–1070 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11255-012-0160-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11255-012-0160-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation