Infectious Complications After Transrectal Versus Transperineal Prostate Biopsy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Background and objective: Prostate biopsies remain a key step in the diagnosis of prostate cancer and are performed either via a transrectal (TR) or a transperineal (TP) route. In general, the approaches are considered to provide similar diagnostic power. However, infectious complications appear to differ in favour of the TP approach. Furthermore, antibiotic prophylaxis is felt to have limited additional value in a TP biopsy, which aligns with antimicrobial stewardship principles. Urology association guidelines have provided conflicting recommendations on the best approach for a prostate biopsy. This systematic review aims to compare the infectious complications and antibiotic usage of the two approaches.

Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines after registration with PROSPERO (CRD42024513309). MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched for articles published until April 1, 2025. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) assessing infectious complications (fever, urinary tract infection, and hospitalisation with infectious complications) following a prostate biopsy were included. The risk of bias was assessed with the RoB 2 tool, and statistical analyses included visualisation through funnel and forest plots and assessing the publication bias via Egger's regression test.

Key findings and limitations: Ten RCTs were included in the analysis, encompassing 4188 prostate biopsies. Of seven studies reporting hospitalisation for infectious complications, the TP route showed significantly lower odds (odds ratio 0.23, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.10-0.54; graphical abstract), reducing hospitalisation risk by 77% compared with the TR route. Postinterventional fever occurred less frequently, with an odds ratio of 0.68 (95% CI 0.52-0.89). There was no statistically significant difference in infectious complications after a TP biopsy with or without antibiotics. All TR route biopsies utilised antibiotic prophylaxis. The small number of eligible studies and the high risk of bias, as well as sparse data on bias in most studies, limit the power of our manuscript.

Conclusions and clinical implications: TP biopsy is associated with a lower admission risk due to postprocedural infection compared with TR biopsy. TP biopsy seems to be a safe procedure without antibiotics in patients without risk factors, advocating for enhanced antimicrobial stewardship in urology.