Literature DB >> 23726443

Morbidity after transperineal prostate biopsy in 3000 patients undergoing 12 vs 18 vs more than 24 needle cores.

Pietro Pepe1, Francesco Aragona.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate clinical complications after transperineal prostate biopsy in patients undergoing 12 vs 18 vs more than 24 cores.
METHODS: From February 2002 to December 2012, 3000 patients (median age, 66 years) underwent transperineal prostate biopsy after an abnormal result on a digital rectal examination, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level >10 ng/mL, PSA values between 4.1 and 10, 2.6 and 4, and <2.5 ng/mL with free/total PSA ≤25%, ≤20%, and ≤15%, respectively. Of these, 915 (30.5%), 1330 (48.5%), and 630 patients (21%) underwent 12, 18, and >24 needle cores under antibiotic prophylaxis. Prostate biopsy-related complications were evaluated within 15 to 20 days after the prostate biopsy. The number of patients who needed hospital admission or an emergency department visit (EDV) was recorded.
RESULTS: Prostate cancer was found in 1150 (38.3%) patients. Side effects after the biopsy occurred in 40.2% of the patients, and the complications were directly correlated with the number of needle cores: 31.5% with 12 cores, 41.8% with 18 cores, and 57.4% with >24 cores (P = .001). Overall hospital admission and EDV were 1.2% and 9.1% and occurred, respectively, in 1% and 6% (12 cores) vs 1.3% and 9.6% (18 cores) vs 1.6% and 14.4% (>24 cores) of the patients. The most frequent complication that needed hospital admission vs EDV was urinary tract infection (0.7%) vs acute urinary retention (6.7%), respectively. No patients developed sepsis.
CONCLUSION: Clinical complications after transperineal prostate biopsy occurred in 40.2% of the patients, but only 1.2% required hospital admission. The number of needle cores (12 vs 18 vs >24) significantly correlated with increased onset of side effects.
Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23726443     DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2013.02.019

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Urology        ISSN: 0090-4295            Impact factor:   2.649


  39 in total

1.  Role of MRI for the detection of prostate cancer.

Authors:  Richard C Wu; Amir H Lebastchi; Boris A Hadaschik; Mark Emberton; Caroline Moore; Pilar Laguna; Jurgen J Fütterer; Arvin K George
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2021-01-04       Impact factor: 4.226

2.  Zero hospital admissions for infection after 577 transperineal prostate biopsies using single-dose cephazolin prophylaxis.

Authors:  Lana Pepdjonovic; Guan Hee Tan; Sean Huang; Sarah Mann; Mark Frydenberg; Daniel Moon; Uri Hanegbi; Adam Landau; Ross Snow; Jeremy Grummet
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2016-12-16       Impact factor: 4.226

3.  Transrectal Ultrasound-guided Versus Transperineal Mapping Prostate Biopsy: Complication Comparison.

Authors:  Vassilios M Skouteris; E David Crawford; Vladimir Mouraviev; Paul Arangua; Marios Panagiotis Metsinis; Michael Skouteris; George Zacharopoulos; Nelson N Stone
Journal:  Rev Urol       Date:  2018

Review 4.  Reducing infection rates after prostate biopsy.

Authors:  Florian M E Wagenlehner; Adrian Pilatz; Przemyslaw Waliszewski; Wolfgang Weidner; Truls E Bjerklund Johansen
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2014-01-14       Impact factor: 14.432

5.  Reducing Infectious Complications Following Transrectal Ultrasound-guided Prostate Biopsy: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Jordon T Walker; Nirmish Singla; Claus G Roehrborn
Journal:  Rev Urol       Date:  2016

6.  Detecting Prostate Cancer.

Authors:  Marko Brock; Christian von Bodman; Jüri Palisaar; Wolfgang Becker; Philipp Martin-Seidel; Joachim Noldus
Journal:  Dtsch Arztebl Int       Date:  2015-09-11       Impact factor: 5.594

7.  A Novel Prediction Tool Based on Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging to Determine the Biopsy Strategy for Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer in Patients with PSA Levels Less than 50 ng/ml.

Authors:  Bi-Ming He; Zhen-Kai Shi; Hu-Sheng Li; Heng-Zhi Lin; Qing-Song Yang; Jian-Ping Lu; Ying-Hao Sun; Hai-Feng Wang
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2019-12-17       Impact factor: 5.344

8.  First report of robot-assisted transperineal fusion versus off-target biopsy in patients undergoing repeat prostate biopsy.

Authors:  S Kaufmann; J Mischinger; B Amend; S Rausch; M Adam; M Scharpf; F Fend; U Kramer; M Notohamiprodjo; K Nikolaou; A Stenzl; J Bedke; S Kruck
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2016-11-15       Impact factor: 4.226

9.  Can MRI/TRUS fusion targeted biopsy replace saturation prostate biopsy in the re-evaluation of men in active surveillance?

Authors:  Pietro Pepe; Antonio Garufi; Giandomenico Priolo; Michele Pennisi
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2015-12-23       Impact factor: 4.226

10.  Erectile dysfunction in 1050 men following extended (18 cores) vs saturation (28 cores) vs saturation plus MRI-targeted prostate biopsy (32 cores).

Authors:  P Pepe; M Pennisi
Journal:  Int J Impot Res       Date:  2015-08-20       Impact factor: 2.896

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.