Saline cleansing can prevent infective complications after transrectal prostate biopsy: A randomized prospective study.

IF 0.8 Q4 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY Urologia Journal Pub Date : 2024-11-01 Epub Date: 2024-08-30 DOI:10.1177/03915603241273888
Taha Çetin, Mehmet Yiğit Yalçın, Mert Hamza Özbilen, Gürkan Cesur, Çağdaş Bildirici, Erkin Karaca, Mahmut Can Karabacak, Erkan Aravacık, Taylan Tığlı, Oğuz Tarhan, Mehmet Yoldaş, Hayal Boyacıoğlu, Serdar Çelik, Gökhan Koç
{"title":"Saline cleansing can prevent infective complications after transrectal prostate biopsy: A randomized prospective study.","authors":"Taha Çetin, Mehmet Yiğit Yalçın, Mert Hamza Özbilen, Gürkan Cesur, Çağdaş Bildirici, Erkin Karaca, Mahmut Can Karabacak, Erkan Aravacık, Taylan Tığlı, Oğuz Tarhan, Mehmet Yoldaş, Hayal Boyacıoğlu, Serdar Çelik, Gökhan Koç","doi":"10.1177/03915603241273888","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To discern whether reduced infection rates were attributed to antiseptic solutions or mechanical rectal irrigation.</p><p><strong>Patients and methods: </strong>After receiving ethical approval, the study included patients who underwent transrectal prostate biopsy due to elevated PSA or abnormal digital rectal examination findings, and prostate cancer under active surveillance, at Tepecik Training and Research Hospital between April 2022 and June 2023. Standard antibiotic prophylaxis was administered. Patients were randomized into three equal groups according to the rectal irrigation strategy.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Overall complications occurred in 4%. Despite distinct cleaning agents, there was no significant difference in infection rates (<i>p</i> = 0.780) or fever incidence (<i>p</i> = 0.776). Pathological analyses revealed comparable outcomes (<i>p</i> = 0.764).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The study challenges the prevailing belief that antiseptic solutions are indispensable for infection prevention, as saline demonstrated similar efficacy. Limitations include data gaps from potential external hospital visits and absent rectal microorganism swab culture. While TRUS-PB remains the gold standard, this study suggests that mechanically cleansing the rectal mucosa with saline-a cost-effective, side-effect-free alternative-may be a viable infection prevention method, particularly beneficial for patients with antiseptic allergies. The findings prompt a reconsideration of the necessity of antiseptic solutions in TRUS-PB, offering an alternative approach to mitigate infectious complications.</p>","PeriodicalId":23574,"journal":{"name":"Urologia Journal","volume":" ","pages":"768-774"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Urologia Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/03915603241273888","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/8/30 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: To discern whether reduced infection rates were attributed to antiseptic solutions or mechanical rectal irrigation.

Patients and methods: After receiving ethical approval, the study included patients who underwent transrectal prostate biopsy due to elevated PSA or abnormal digital rectal examination findings, and prostate cancer under active surveillance, at Tepecik Training and Research Hospital between April 2022 and June 2023. Standard antibiotic prophylaxis was administered. Patients were randomized into three equal groups according to the rectal irrigation strategy.

Results: Overall complications occurred in 4%. Despite distinct cleaning agents, there was no significant difference in infection rates (p = 0.780) or fever incidence (p = 0.776). Pathological analyses revealed comparable outcomes (p = 0.764).

Conclusion: The study challenges the prevailing belief that antiseptic solutions are indispensable for infection prevention, as saline demonstrated similar efficacy. Limitations include data gaps from potential external hospital visits and absent rectal microorganism swab culture. While TRUS-PB remains the gold standard, this study suggests that mechanically cleansing the rectal mucosa with saline-a cost-effective, side-effect-free alternative-may be a viable infection prevention method, particularly beneficial for patients with antiseptic allergies. The findings prompt a reconsideration of the necessity of antiseptic solutions in TRUS-PB, offering an alternative approach to mitigate infectious complications.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
生理盐水清洗可预防经直肠前列腺活检术后感染并发症:一项随机前瞻性研究。
目的:了解感染率的降低是否归因于消毒液或机械直肠冲洗:在获得伦理批准后,该研究纳入了2022年4月至2023年6月期间在特佩契克培训与研究医院因PSA升高或数字直肠检查结果异常而接受经直肠前列腺活检的前列腺癌患者。采用标准抗生素预防。根据直肠冲洗策略将患者随机分为三组:总并发症发生率为 4%。尽管采用了不同的清洗剂,但感染率(P = 0.780)或发热发生率(P = 0.776)并无显著差异。病理分析显示结果相当(p = 0.764):这项研究对普遍认为消毒液是预防感染不可或缺的药物这一观点提出了质疑,因为生理盐水也具有类似的疗效。研究的局限性包括潜在的外部医院就诊和直肠微生物拭子培养的缺失。虽然 TRUS-PB 仍是金标准,但本研究表明,用生理盐水机械清洗直肠粘膜--一种经济有效、无副作用的替代方法--可能是一种可行的感染预防方法,尤其对防腐剂过敏的患者有益。研究结果促使人们重新考虑在 TRUS-PB 中使用消毒溶液的必要性,为减轻感染并发症提供了另一种方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Urologia Journal
Urologia Journal UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY-
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
12.50%
发文量
66
期刊最新文献
Risk factors for benign uretero-enteric anastomotic strictures after open radical cystectomy and ileal conduit. On integrative analysis of multi-level gene expression data in Kidney cancer subgrouping. A new approach to repair recurrent vescicourethral anastomotic strictures after radical prostatectomy: The use of prerectal access. Potential value of Prostate Cancer Antigen 3 score in prediction of final cancer pathology parameters in radical prostatectomy patients. Retrograde urethrography (RUG) combined with voiding cystourethrography (VCUG) versus surgical findings in assessment of urethral strictures length.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1