Evidence Hub

Rectal Swab-based Targeted Prophylactic Antibiotics Reduce Infectious Complications After Transrectal Prostate Biopsy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Tsuboi I, Kardoust Parizi M, Matsukawa A, Miszczyk M, Fazekas T, Cormio A, Kawada T, Katayama S et al.

European urology open science, 2025

3,002 participants · 2 citations

Abstract

Background and objective: Transperineal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy is the recommended approach in guidelines, while transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy (TRUS-PB) is still widely used to diagnose prostate cancer (PCa); however, it is associated with a significant rate of infectious complications. We aimed to assess the efficacy of targeted prophylactic antibiotics (TPAs), based on rectal swabs, in reducing the incidence of infectious complications after TRUS-PB compared with empiric prophylactic antibiotics.

Methods: PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus were queried in December 2024 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing infectious complications between patients who received TPAs based on rectal swab culture before TRUS-PB and those who received empiric prophylactic antibiotics before TRUS-PB (PROSPERO: CRD42024523794). The primary outcomes were the incidence rates of febrile urinary tract infection (fUTI) and sepsis.

Key findings and limitations: Overall, nine RCTs (n = 3002) were included in our analyses. The incidence of fUTI was approximately half as high in patients who received TPAs as in those who received empiric prophylactic antibiotics (n = 3002, 2.7% vs 5.2%, risk ratio [RR]: 0.54, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.36-0.81, p = 0.003). Based on these pooled incidence rates, the number of patients needed to treat to prevent fUTI after TRUS-PB was 40; however, there was no statistically significant difference in the incidence of sepsis between…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 3,002 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free