Skip to content
akaturk Academic measurement

Article detail · 2021

A novel enema method can prevent infectious complications of transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy: A single centre experience

International Journal of Clinical Practice

YÖKSİS OpenAlex SJR Q2 JCR Q2 Citations 3 Percentile 56.6% FWCI 0.26
Year
2021
ISSN
1368-5031
Type
article

Data source split

  • YÖKSİS YÖKSİS article record
  • OpenAlex OpenAlex enrichment (abstract, citations, topics)

Abstract

English (OpenAlex)

BACKGROUND: TRUS biopsy is the preferred method for diagnosing prostate cancer, but it can cause infectious complications that arise with the contribution of fluoroquinolone resistance. We aimed to explore the potential protective effect of a second rectal enema before biopsy. METHODS: From January 2015 to December 2020, 419 patients were assessed retrospectively. Patients with a history of anticoagulant use, uncontrolled diabetes, urological surgery, prostate biopsy or recent hospitalisation or overseas travel, as well as those with the previous prostatitis, were excluded from the study. The patients were subsequently divided into two groups: Group 1 (n = 223) had received one enema, on the morning of the biopsy and Group 2 (n = 196) had received two, with the additional enema administered half an hour before the procedure. RESULTS: There was no significant difference between the groups in terms of age(P = .076), BMI (P = .489), diabetes (P = .265), prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level (P = .193), free/total PSA (f/t PSA) ratio (P = .518) and prostate size (P = .661) or in relation to cancer detection (P = .428). The median hospitalisation date was significantly higher in Group 1 (P = .003) as was urinary tract infection (UTI) development (P = .004). However, there was no significant difference in terms of fever and sepsis (P = .524 and P = .548, respectively). Additionally, subgroup analysis demonstrated that UTI was significantly lower in patients with diabetes mellitus who had received a second enema (P = .004), though there was no significant difference in UTI between the groups in those without diabetes mellitus (P = .215). Multivariable analysis showed that age and diabetes were significant risk factors for the development of UTI (OR: 1.074, 95% CI: 1.027-1.130, P = .002 and OR: 1.220, 95% CI: 0.131-0.665, P = .003, respectively). Furthermore, the second enema was a significant protective factor for preventing UTI (OR: -1.794, 95% CI: 2.208-16.389, P < .001). CONCLUSION: Older age and the presence of diabetes mellitus are independent risk factors for UTI after prostate biopsy. A second enema procedure before biopsy may protect patients from related infectious complications and could therefore be used as an alternative preventative method.

Topics

  • Prostate Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
  • Urinary Tract Infections Management
  • Urinary Bladder and Prostate Research

Primary topic Prostate Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment

Authors

  1. FATİH GÖKALP HATAY MUSTAFA KEMAL ÜNİVERSİTESİ
  2. ÖMER KORAŞ
  3. DİDAR GÜRSOY KUZULUK HATAY MUSTAFA KEMAL ÜNİVERSİTESİ
  4. HAKAN ŞIĞVA
  5. SEFA BURAK PORGALI
  6. NEZİH TAMKAÇ HATAY MUSTAFA KEMAL ÜNİVERSİTESİ
  7. BİLAL KULAK
  8. FERHAT UÇURMAK
  9. SADIK GÖRÜR HATAY MUSTAFA KEMAL ÜNİVERSİTESİ