Purpose: Prostate biopsy is the gold standard for prostate cancer diagnosis; unfortunately, this procedure is not free from complications. Recent studies have shown an increase in antibiotic resistance. The aim of our prospective randomized study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a prostate biopsy prophylaxis protocol using 2 vs. 3 fosfomycin doses. Methods: Two hundred and ninety-seven patients undergoing transrectal systematic ultrasound (US)-guided (n = 277) or transrectal fusion prostate biopsy (n = 20) were prospectively evaluated and randomized by date of birth, to receive 2 (even years, group A) versus 3 doses of fosfomycin (odd years, group B), and prospectively evaluated. Results: Two hundred and ninety-seven patients were randomized to group A (n = 162) or group B (n = 135). The 2 groups were comparable with respect to age, comorbidity, PSA value, prostate volume, operative time and urine culture results. Out of 297 patients, 44 (14.8%) developed complications after the procedure; 2.7% (8/297) of patients developed fever >38° requiring hospitalization (6 [3.7%] in group A and 2 [1.5%] in group B, p = 0.29). Patients who underwent fusion biopsy were more frequently readmitted in comparison with patients undergoing US-guided prostate biopsy (p = 0.000). Conclusion: The low fever and prostatitis rate suggest that fosfomycin prophylaxis is safe and efficient. There is no significant difference in clinical outcome between the 2 dosage regimens.

Loeb S, Carter HB, Berndt SI, Ricker W, Schaeffer EM. Complications after prostate biopsy: data from SEER-Medicare.
J Urol
. 2011 Nov;186(5):1830–4.
Carignan A, Roussy JF, Lapointe V, Valiquette L, Sabbagh R, Pépin J. Increasing risk of infectious complications after transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsies: time to reassess antimicrobial prophylaxis?
Eur Urol
. 2012 Sep;62(3):453–9.
Taylor S, Margolick J, Abughosh Z, Goldenberg SL, Lange D, Bowie WR, et al. Ciprofloxacin resistance in the faecal carriage of patients undergoing transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy.
. 2013 May;111(6):946–53.
Hasanzadeh A, Pourmand MR, Alizadeh A, Pourmand G. Prevalence and significance of fluoroquinolone-resistant bacteria carriage in patients undergoing transrectal ultrasound prostate biopsy.
Urol J
. 2017 May;14(3):3085–90.
Michalopoulos AS, Livaditis IG, Gougoutas V. The revival of fosfomycin.
Int J Infect Dis
. 2011 Nov;15(11):e732–9.
Falagas ME, Kastoris AC, Kapaskelis AM, Karageorgopoulos DE. Fosfomycin for the treatment of multidrug-resistant, including extended-spectrum beta-lactamase producing, Enterobacteriaceae infections: a systematic review.
Lancet Infect Dis
. 2010 Jan;10(1):43–50.
Patel SS, Balfour JA, Bryson HM. Fosfomycin tromethamine. A review of its antibacterial activity, pharmacokinetic properties and therapeutic efficacy as a single-dose oral treatment for acute uncomplicated lower urinary tract infections.
. 1997 Apr;53(4):637–56.
Dijkmans AC, Zacarías NV, Burggraaf J, Mouton JW, Wilms EB, van Nieuwkoop C, et al. Fosfomycin: Pharmacological, Clinical and Future Perspectives.
Antibiotics (Basel)
. 2017 Oct;6(4):E24.
Cai T, Gallelli L, Cocci A, Tiscione D, Verze P, Lanciotti M, et al. Antimicrobial prophylaxis for transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy: fosfomycin trometamol, an attractive alternative.
World J Urol
. 2017 Feb;35(2):221–8.
Roberts MJ, Scott S, Harris PN, Naber K, Wagenlehner FM, Doi SA. Comparison of fosfomycin against fluoroquinolones for transrectal prostate biopsy prophylaxis: an individual patient-data meta-analysis.
World J Urol
. 2018 Mar;36(3):323–30.
Mottet N, Bellmunt J, Briers E, Bolla M, Bourke L, et al. 2016 EAU Guidelines on Prostate Cancer
Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA. Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey.
Ann Surg
. 2004 Aug;240(2):205–13.
Rhodes NJ, Gardiner BJ, Neely MN, Grayson ML, Ellis AG, Lawrentschuk N, et al. Optimal timing of oral fosfomycin administration for pre-prostate biopsy prophylaxis.
J Antimicrob Chemother
. 2015 Jul;70(7):2068–73.
Sen V, Aydogdu O, Bozkurt IH, Yonguc T, Sen P, Polat S, et al. The use of prophylactic single-dose fosfomycin in patients who undergo transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy: A prospective, randomized, and controlled clinical study.
Can Urol Assoc J
. 2015 Nov-Dec;9(11-12):E863–7.
Fahmy AM, Kotb A, Youssif TA, Abdeldiam H, Algebaly O, Elabbady A. Fosfomycin antimicrobial prophylaxis for transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy of the prostate: A prospective randomised study.
Arab J Urol
. 2016 Jun;14(3):228–33.
Lista F, Redondo C, Meilán E, García-Tello A, Ramón de Fata F, Angulo JC. Efficacy and safety of fosfomycin-trometamol in the prophylaxis for transrectal prostate biopsy. Prospective randomized comparison with ciprofloxacin.
Actas Urol Esp
. 2014 Jul-Aug;38(6):391–6.
Ongün S, Aslan G, Avkan-Oguz V. The effectiveness of single-dose fosfomycin as -antimicrobial prophylaxis for patients undergoing transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy of the prostate.
Urol Int
. 2012;89(4):439–44.
Bonkat G, Pickard R, Bartoletti R, Cai T, Bruyère F, et al. EAU Guidelines of Urological Infections. 2018.
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.