ArticleWorld journal of urology2014
Peri-procedural povidone-iodine rectal preparation reduces microorganism counts and infectious complications following ultrasound-guided needle biopsy of the prostate.
Article in World journal of urology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Antimicrobial lubricant reduces rectal bacteria at transrectal prostate biopsy: results from a prospective randomized trial.World journal of urology · 2018Trial
- Dutasteride is associated with reduced risk of transrectal prostate biopsy-associated urinary tract infection and related hospitalizations.World journal of urology · 2017Trial
- Topical antiseptic at time of transrectal ultrasound prostate biopsy is associated with fewer severe clinical infections and improves antibiotic stewardship.Prostate international · 2021Article
- Transrectal povidone-iodine efficiency in reducing infections occurring after transrectal ultrasound guided biopsy of the prostate.Medicine · 2021Article
- Topical rectal antiseptic at time of prostate biopsy: how a resident patient safety project has evolved into institutional practice.International urology and nephrology · 2018Article
- Does Leaving the Biopsy Needle in Povidone-Iodine Solution Reduce Infective Complications after Biopsy?Advances in urology · 2016Article
- Strategies for prevention of ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy infections.Infection and drug resistance · 2016Review
- Povidone Iodine Rectal Preparation at Time of Prostate Needle Biopsy is a Simple and Reproducible Means to Reduce Risk of Procedural Infection.Journal of visualized experiments : JoVE · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe purpose of the study was to evaluate whether a peri-procedural povidone-iodine rectal preparation (PIRP) prior to transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate needle biopsy (TRUS PNB) can reduce microorganism colony counts and infectious complications.
methodsOur institutional TRUS PNB database was reviewed to identify infectious post-biopsy complications (defined as fever >38.5 °C with positive culture). The last 570 biopsy patients were divided into those administered only preoperative oral and/or parenteral antibiotics (n = 456; chronologically cohorts A-D) versus men receiving peri-procedural PIRP in conjunction with standard preoperative antibiotics (n = 114; cohort E). Rectal cultures were obtained in the PIRP cohort to quantify changes in microorganism colony counts.
resultsMean baseline PSA for patients was 11.6 ng/ml, 63 % were undergoing an initial biopsy, and 17 % had documented use of antibiotic therapy within the previous 6 months. A reduction in infectious complications was observed when comparing the conventional antibiotic (cohorts A-D) versus PIRP (cohort E) group (1.8 vs. 0 %), with the largest magnitude of decline occurring in the concurrent contemporary cohorts (cohort D-5.3 % vs. cohort E-0 %, p = 0.03). Rectal cultures obtained in 92 men before and after PIRP administration noted a 97 % reduction in microorganism colonies (2.1 × 10(5) vs. 6.3 × 10(3) CFU/ml, p < 0.001). No adverse reactions to the PIRP were reported by patients 7 days post-biopsy.
conclusionsPeri-procedural PIRP decreased microorganism colony counts and effectively reduced infectious complications following TRUS PNB. This safe, cheap, and simple strategy may be a reasonable alternative to systemic or targeted antibiotic therapy to reduce post-biopsy infections.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.