Cited by 13Escherichia coli research studiesUrinary Tract Infections ManagementAntibiotic Resistance in Bacteria

Epidemiology and O-Serotypes of Extraintestinal Pathogenic Escherichia coli Disease in Patients Undergoing Transrectal Ultrasound Prostate Biopsy: A Prospective Multicenter Study

Open access
Rosenberg, Steven, Bonten, Marc, Haazen, Wouter, Spiessens, Bart, Abbanat, Darren, Go, Oscar, Wagenlehner, Florian, Shore, Neal +5 more·2021·Journal of Urology

Abstract

Purpose: Extraintestinal pathogenic Escherichia coli (ExPEC) are a leading cause of invasive infections in adults.The study aimed to evaluate the incidence of microbiologically confirmed invasive ExPEC disease in patients undergoing transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate needle biopsy (TRUS-PNB), O-serotype distribution and antibiotic resistance profiles of associated E. coli isolates.Materials and Methods: Adult men (18 years) undergoing TRUS-PNB were enrolled.The TRUS-PNB procedure was performed according to local standard of care, including preferences of prophylactic antibiotics.Clinical and microbiological data were collected.Results: Of the 4,951 patients (mean age 66.9 years) enrolled 4,935 (99.7%) underwent TRUS-PNB (95.1% received prophylactic antibiotics); 98.9% completed the study.Overall incidence of invasive ExPEC disease was 0.67% (33/4,935 patients; 95% CI 0.46e0.94);highest incidence was in the U.S. (0.97%, 14/1,446; 95% CI 0.53e1.62).Prevalence of the 10 selected O-serotypes O1, O2, O4, O6, O8, O15, O16, O18, O25 and O75 was 52.0% (95% CI 31.3e72.2).E. coli isolates showed highest resistance rates to levofloxacin and ciprofloxacin (76%; 95% CI 54.8e90.6 for both).Among fluoroquinolone-resistant ExPEC isolates, prevalence of the 10 selected O-serotypes was 60%.Conclusions: This study provides an estimate of microbiologically confirmed invasive ExPEC disease incidence following TRUS-PNB.Information on E. coli O-serotype distribution and associated antibiotic resistance profiles from invasive ExPEC disease cases in the first 30 days following TRUS-PNB may help guiding antibiotic use and inform development of a prophylactic ExPEC vaccine.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/ju.0000000000001425

Cites

11 of 11 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • E. coli Nissle 1917 is characterized by an LPS-type O6, commonly found in extra-intestinal pathogenic E. coli.

    “E. coli Nissle 1917 is characterized by an LPS-type, O6, commonly found in extra-intestinal pathogenic E. coli [29, 30, 146].”

    From Selection, Comparative Genomics, and Potential Probiotic Features of Escherichia coli 5C, a pks-Negative Strain Isolated from Healthy Infant Donor Feces (2026) · cites this paper as [146]

    The Phenotypic Characterization section identifies O6 as an O-serotype studied in extraintestinal pathogenic E. coli, and Table 3 reports O6 in 2 of 25 isolates (8%) from patients undergoing prostate biopsy. The paper does not characterize E. coli Nissle 1917 or establish that O6 is commonly found in extraintestinal pathogenic E. coli generally. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 9

  1. Poolman JT and Wacker M: Extraintestinal pathogenic Escherichia coli, a common human pathogen: challenges for vaccine development and progress in the field. J Infect Dis 2016; 213: 6.
  2. Dumford D III, Suwantarat N, Bhasker V et al: Outbreak of fluoroquinolone-resistant Escher- ichia coli infections after transrectal ultrasound- guided biopsy of the prostate. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2013; 34: 269.
  3. Eruz ED, Yalci A, Ozden E et al: Risk factors for infection development after transrectal prostate biopsy and the role of resistant bacteria in colonic flora. J Infect Dev Ctries 2017; 11: 188.
  4. Feliciano J, Teper E, Ferrandino M et al: The incidence of fluoroquinolone resistant infections after prostate biopsydare fluoroquinolones still effective prophylaxis? J Urol 2008; 179: 952.
  5. Liss MA, Chang A, Santos R et al: Prevalence and significance of fluoroquinolone resistant Escherichia coli in patients undergoing trans- rectal ultrasound guided prostate needle biopsy. J Urol 2011; 185: 1283.
  6. Suwantarat N, Rudin SD, Marshall SH et al: In- fections caused by fluoroquinolone-resistant Escherichia coli following transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy of the prostate. J Glob Antimicrob Resist 2014; 2: 71.
  7. Williamson DA, Barrett LK, Rogers BA et al: In- fectious complications following transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy: new chal- lenges in the era of multidrug-resistant Escher- ichia coli. Clin Infect Dis 2013; 57: 267.
  8. Williamson DA, Roberts SA, Paterson DL et al: Escherichia coli bloodstream infection after transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy: implications of fluoroquinolone-resistant sequence type 131 as a major causative path- ogen. Clin Infect Dis 2012; 54: 1406.
  9. Liss MA, Johnson JR, Porter SB et al: Clinical and microbiological determinants of infection after transrectal prostate biopsy. Clin Infect Dis 2015; 60: 979.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Rosenberg, S., Bonten, M., Haazen, W., Spiessens, B., Abbanat, D., Go, O., Wagenlehner, F., Shore, N., Hagiwara, Y., Ibarra de Palacios, P., Geurtsen, J., Hermans, P., & Poolman, J.
Affiliations
  • The Iowa Clinic, West Des Moines, Iowa
  • University Medical Center Utrecht (NL)
  • Janssen (Belgium) (BE)
  • Janssen Research & Development (United States) (US)
  • Clinic for Urology, Pediatric Urology and Andrology, Justus-Liebig University, Giessen, Germany
  • Carolina Urologic Research Center (US)
  • Janssen Pharmaceutical K.K. (Japan) (JP)
  • Janssen Vaccines, Bern, Switzerland
  • Janssen (Netherlands) (NL)
Venue
Journal of Urology
Published
2021-03
Volume
205
Issue
3
Pages
826-832
ISSN
  • 0022-5347 (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-3792
OpenAlex
W3094538887
Cited by
13
References
11
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1
FWCI
0.62
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc-nd
Locations
  • The Journal of Urology (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Utrecht University Repository (Utrecht University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Endocrinology › Escherichia coli research studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Urinary Tract Infections Management
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Medicine › Antibiotic Resistance in Bacteria
Keywords
extraintestinal pathogenic Escherichia coli, transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy, O serotypes, antibiotic resistance, fluoroquinolone resistance, levofloxacin resistance, ciprofloxacin resistance, antibiotic prophylaxis, incidence, post-biopsy infection
MeSH terms
Extraintestinal Pathogenic Escherichia coli, Aged, Escherichia coli Infections, Humans, Male, Microbial Sensitivity Tests, Prospective Studies, Prostate, Serotyping, Incidence, Antibiotic Prophylaxis, Ultrasound, High-Intensity Focused, Transrectal, Image-Guided Biopsy

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review