Background: To prevent infectious complications after transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy (TRUS-PB), some studies have investigated the efficacy of rectal disinfection using povidone-iodine (PI) and antibiotic prophylaxis (AP).
Objective: To summarize available data and compare the efficacy of rectal disinfection using PI with non-PI methods prior to TRUS-PB.
Evidence acquisition: Three databases were queried through November 2023 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) analyzing patients who underwent TRUS-PB. We compared the effectiveness of rectal disinfection between PI groups and non-PI groups with or without AP. The primary outcomes of interest were the rates of overall infectious complications, fever, and sepsis. Subgroups analyses were conducted to assess the differential outcomes in patients using fluoroquinolone groups compared to those using other antibiotics groups.
Evidence synthesis: We included ten RCTs in the meta-analyses. The overall rates of infectious complications were significantly lower when rectal disinfection with PI was performed (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.42-0.74, p < 0.001). Compared to AP monotherapy, the combination of AP and PI was associated with significantly lower risk of infectious complications (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.40-0.73, p < 0.001) and fever (RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.30-0.75, p = 0.001), but not with sepsis (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.23-1.04, p = 0.06). The use of fluoroquinolone antibiotics was associated with a lower risk of infectious complications and fever compared to non-FQ antibiotics.
Conclusion: Rectal disinfection with PI significantly reduces the rates of infectious complications and fever in patients undergoing TRUS-PB. However, this approach does not show a significant impact on reducing the rate of sepsis following the procedure.
Keywords: Antibiotic prophylaxis; Povidone-iodine; Transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy.
© 2024. The Author(s).