Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Prevention and Treatment of Biopsy-Related Complications

  • Prostate Cancer (D Parekh, Section Editor)
  • Published:
Current Urology Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Transrectal biopsy of the prostate is necessary in the diagnosis of prostate cancer (PC). Though generally considered safe, patients encounter minor complications such as bleeding and urinary symptoms, and uncommonly, serious infections that may require antibiotic therapy, visits to the emergency room (ER) or hospital admission, causing morbidity and rarely even mortality. It is concerning that infections are on the rise due to resistant bacteria. Urologists will have to be aware of bacterial susceptibility studies to reduce such complications. This review focuses on prostate biopsy and its complications, and measures to reduce these complications in our practice.

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

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. Sieber PR et al. Antibiotic prophylaxis in ultrasound guided transrectal prostate biopsy. J Urol. 1997;157(6):2199–200.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Levine MA et al. Two consecutive sets of transrectal ultrasound guided sextant biopsies of the prostate for the detection of prostate cancer. J Urol. 1998;159(2):471–5. discussion 475–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Enlund AL, Varenhorst E. Morbidity of ultrasound-guided transrectal core biopsy of the prostate without prophylactic antibiotic therapy. A prospective study in 415 cases. Br J Urol. 1997;79(5):777–80.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Pinkhasov GI et al. Complications following prostate needle biopsy requiring hospital admission or emergency department visits - experience from 1000 consecutive cases. BJU Int. 2012;110(3):369–74. This article focuses on a single center experience of over 1,000 biopsies, with emphasis on reasons for admission and ER visits.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Puig J et al. Transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy: is antibiotic prophylaxis necessary? Eur Radiol. 2006;16(4):939–43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Loeb S et al. Complications after prostate biopsy: data from SEER-Medicare. J Urol. 2011;186(5):1830–4. This article concludes that serious infections are on the rise and serious non-infections are stable.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Carmignani L et al. Bacterial sepsis following prostatic biopsy. Int Urol Nephrol. 2012;44(4):1055–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Carter HB et al. Early detection of prostate cancer: AUA Guideline. J Urol. 2013;190(2):419–26.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Koc G et al. Does washing the biopsy needle with povidone-iodine have an effect on infection rates after transrectal prostate needle biopsy? Urol Int. 2010;85(2):147–51.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Toren P, Razik R, Trachtenberg J. Catastrophic sepsis and hemorrhage following transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsies. Can Urol Assoc J. 2010;4(1):E12–4.

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Raaijmakers R et al. Complication rates and risk factors of 5802 transrectal ultrasound-guided sextant biopsies of the prostate within a population-based screening program. Urology. 2002;60(5):826–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Zaytoun OM et al. Morbidity of prostate biopsy after simplified versus complex preparation protocols: assessment of risk factors. Urology. 2011;77(4):910–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Ghani KR, Dundas D, Patel U. Bleeding after transrectal ultrasonography-guided prostate biopsy: a study of 7-day morbidity after a six-, eight- and 12-core biopsy protocol. BJU Int. 2004;94(7):1014–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Chowdhury R et al. Should warfarin or aspirin be stopped prior to prostate biopsy? An analysis of bleeding complications related to increasing sample number regimes. Clin Radiol. 2012;67(12):e64–70.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Cicione A et al. Prostate biopsy quality is independent of needle size: a randomized single-center prospective study. Urol Int. 2012;89(1):57–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Rosario DJ et al. Short term outcomes of prostate biopsy in men tested for cancer by prostate specific antigen: prospective evaluation within ProtecT study. BMJ. 2012;344:d7894.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Petroski RA, Griewe GL, Schenkman NS. Delayed life-threatening hemorrhage after transrectal prostate needle biopsy. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2003;6(2):190–2.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Katsinelos P et al. Endoclipping treatment of life-threatening rectal bleeding after prostate biopsy. World J Gastroenterol. 2009;15(9):1130–3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Manoharan M et al. Hemospermia following transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy: a prospective study. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2007;10(3):283–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Berger AP et al. Complication rate of transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy: a comparison among 3 protocols with 6, 10 and 15 cores. J Urol. 2004;171(4):1478–80. discussion 1480–1.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Abdelkhalek M et al. Hemosepermia after transrectal ultrasound-guided prostatic biopsy: a prospective study. Urol Ann. 2013;5(1):30–3.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Brullet E et al. Massive rectal bleeding following transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy. Endoscopy. 2000;32(10):792–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Kilciler M et al. The effect of rectal Foley catheterization on rectal bleeding rates after transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2008;19(9):1344–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Pacios E et al. Endoscopic treatment of massive rectal bleeding following transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy. Scand J Urol Nephrol. 2007;41(6):561–2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Siegelbaum MH et al. Congenital pelvic arteriovenous malformation with massive prostatic hemorrhage: a case report. J Urol. 1989;141(2):382–4.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Kaneko T et al. Transcatheter arterial embolization for bleeding of prostatic artery after prostate biopsy. Nihon Hinyokika Gakkai Zasshi. 2003;94(7):693–5.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Abd-Alazeez M, et al. The accuracy of multiparametric MRI in men with negative biopsy and elevated PSA level-Can it rule out clinically significant prostate cancer? Urol Oncol. 2013.

  28. Rodriguez LV, Terris MK. Risks and complications of transrectal ultrasound guided prostate needle biopsy: a prospective study and review of the literature. J Urol. 1998;160(6 Pt 1):2115–20.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Carmignani L et al. Transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsies in patients taking aspirin for cardiovascular disease: a meta-analysis. Transfus Apher Sci. 2011;45(3):275–80. This article concludes that stopping aspirin routinely is not necessary, because it does not increase the risk of moderate or severe bleeding after prostate biopsy.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Armstrong MJ et al. Summary of evidence-based guideline: periprocedural management of antithrombotic medications in patients with ischemic cerebrovascular disease: report of the Guideline Development Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology. Neurology. 2013;80(22):2065–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Brewster SF et al. Fatal anaerobic infection following transrectal biopsy of a rare prostatic tumour. Br J Urol. 1993;72(6):977–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Brown RW et al. Bacteremia and bacteriuria after transrectal prostatic biopsy. Urology. 1981;18(2):145–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Nam RK et al. Increasing hospital admission rates for urological complications after transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy. J Urol. 2013;189(1 Suppl):S12–7. discussion S17-8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Al-Hasan MN et al. Antimicrobial resistance trends of Escherichia coli bloodstream isolates: a population-based study, 1998–2007. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2009;64(1):169–74.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Chen YH et al. Antimicrobial susceptibility profiles of aerobic and facultative Gram-negative bacilli isolated from patients with intra-abdominal infections in the Asia-Pacific region according to currently established susceptibility interpretive criteria. J Infect. 2011;62(4):280–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Batura D et al. Adding amikacin to fluoroquinolone-based antimicrobial prophylaxis reduces prostate biopsy infection rates. BJU Int. 2011;107(5):760–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Abughosh Z et al. A prospective randomized trial of povidone-iodine prophylactic cleansing of the rectum before transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy. J Urol. 2013;189(4):1326–31.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Ghafoori M et al. Decrease in infection rate following use of povidone-iodine during transrectal ultrasound guided biopsy of the prostate: a double blind randomized clinical trial. Iran J Radiol. 2012;9(2):67–70.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Zani EL, Clark OA, Rodrigues Netto Jr N. Antibiotic prophylaxis for transrectal prostate biopsy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011;5, CD006576.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Vallancien G et al. Systematic prostatic biopsies in 100 men with no suspicion of cancer on digital rectal examination. J Urol. 1991;146(5):1308–12.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Carey JM, Korman HJ. Transrectal ultrasound guided biopsy of the prostate. Do enemas decrease clinically significant complications? J Urol. 2001;166(1):82–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Jeon SS et al. Bisacodyl rectal preparation can decrease infectious complications of transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy. Urology. 2003;62(3):461–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Adibi M et al. Reduction in hospital admission rates due to post-prostate biopsy infections after augmenting standard antibiotic prophylaxis. J Urol. 2013;189(2):535–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Horcajada JP et al. High prevalence of extended-spectrum beta-lactamase-producing enterobacteriaceae in bacteremia after transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy: a need for changing preventive protocol. Urology. 2009;74(6):1195–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Gan VH et al. Does periprostatic block increase the transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) biopsy sepsis rate in men with elevated PSA? Ann Acad Med Singap. 2013;42(4):168–72.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Pace G et al. Cephalosporins periprostatic injection: are really effective on infections following prostate biopsy? Int Urol Nephrol. 2012;44(4):1065–70.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Taylor S et al. Ciprofloxacin resistance in the faecal carriage of patients undergoing transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy. BJU Int. 2013;111(6):946–53.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Liss MA et al. Prevalence and significance of fluoroquinolone resistant Escherichia coli in patients undergoing transrectal ultrasound guided prostate needle biopsy. J Urol. 2011;185(4):1283–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Steensels D et al. Fluoroquinolone-resistant E. coli in intestinal flora of patients undergoing transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy–should we reassess our practices for antibiotic prophylaxis? Clin Microbiol Infect. 2012;18(6):575–81.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Duplessis CA et al. Rectal cultures before transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy reduce post-prostatic biopsy infection rates. Urology. 2012;79(3):556–61.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Patel U et al. Infection after transrectal ultrasonography-guided prostate biopsy: increased relative risks after recent international travel or antibiotic use. BJU Int. 2012;109(12):1781–5. Very interesting article that focuses on bowel flora alterations after international travel and possible higher infections.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Kennedy K, Collignon P. Colonisation with Escherichia coli resistant to "critically important" antibiotics: a high risk for international travellers. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2010;29(12):1501–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Suzuki M et al. Safety of transperineal 14-core systematic prostate biopsy in diabetic men. Int J Urol. 2009;16(12):930–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Shen PF et al. The results of transperineal versus transrectal prostate biopsy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Asian J Androl. 2012;14(2):310–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Issa MM, et al. Formalin Disinfection of Biopsy Needle Minimizes the Risk of Sepsis Following Prostate Biopsy. J Urol. 2013.

  56. Tuncel A et al. Does disposable needle guide minimize infectious complications after transrectal prostate needle biopsy? Urology. 2008;71(6):1024–7. discussion 1027–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Loeb S et al. Is repeat prostate biopsy associated with a greater risk of hospitalization? Data from SEER-Medicare. J Urol. 2013;189(3):867–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Fujita K et al. Serial prostate biopsies are associated with an increased risk of erectile dysfunction in men with prostate cancer on active surveillance. J Urol. 2009;182(6):2664–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Hilton JF et al. The impact of serial prostate biopsies on sexual function in men on active surveillance for prostate cancer. J Urol. 2012;188(4):1252–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Akyol I, Adayener C. Transient impotence after transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy. J Clin Ultrasound. 2008;36(1):33–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Akbal C et al. Erectile function in prostate cancer-free patients who underwent prostate saturation biopsy. Eur Urol. 2008;53(3):540–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Zisman A et al. The impact of prostate biopsy on patient well-being: a prospective study of voiding impairment. J Urol. 2001;166(6):2242–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Bozlu M et al. Voiding impairment after prostate biopsy: does tamsulosin treatment before biopsy decrease this morbidity? Urology. 2003;62(6):1050–3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Pinsky PF, Parnes HL, Andriole G. Mortality and Complications Following Prostate Biopsy in the PLCO Cancer Screening Trial. BJU Int. 2013.

  65. Loeb S, et al. Systematic review of complications of prostate biopsy. Eur Urol, 2013. This is a comprehensive review of post biopsy complications.

  66. Loeb S et al. Infectious complications and hospital admissions after prostate biopsy in a European randomized trial. Eur Urol. 2012;61(6):1110–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Compliance with Ethics Guidelines

Conflict of Interest

Dr. Ramgopal Satyanarayana declares no potential conflicts of interest relevant to this article.

Dr. Dipen Parekh serves as Section Editor for Current Urology Reports.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, University of Miami Miller school of Medicine, 1400, NW 10th Ave Suite 507, Dominion Towers, Miami, FL, 33136, USA

    Ramgopal Satyanarayana & Dipen Parekh

Authors
  1. Ramgopal Satyanarayana
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Dipen Parekh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ramgopal Satyanarayana.

Additional information

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Prostate Cancer

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Satyanarayana, R., Parekh, D. Prevention and Treatment of Biopsy-Related Complications. Curr Urol Rep 15, 381 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11934-013-0381-2

Download citation

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11934-013-0381-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation