PURPOSE: We aimed to study side effects, complications, and patient acceptance of magnetic resonance imaging-guided real-time biopsy (MRI-GB) of the prostate. METHODS: Fifty-four men (49-78 years) with elevated prostate-specific antigen after at least one negative systematic transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy (TRUS-GB) were included in a prospective clinical study. Suspicious areas on images were selectively sampled by obtaining a median of four specimens (range, 1-9 specimens) using MRI-GB. In TRUS-GB, a median of 10 specimens (range, 6-14 specimens) were obtained. Telephone interviews were conducted one week after outpatient MRI-GB, asking patients about pain and side effects (hematuria, hemospermia, rectal bleeding, fever, and chills) of the two biopsy procedures and which of the two procedures they preferred. Multinomial regression analysis and Fisher's exact test was used to test for differences. RESULTS: MRI-GB was preferred by 65% (35/54), and 82% (44/54) would undergo MRI-GB again. Pain intensity (P = 0.005) and bleeding duration (P = 0.004) were significantly lower for MRI-GB compared with TRUS-GB. Hematuria was less common after MRI-GB compared with TRUS-GB (P = 0.006). A high correlation was given between bleeding intensity and bleeding duration for TRUS-GB (r=0.77) and pain intensity and pain duration for MRI-GB (r=0.65). Although hemospermia, rectal hemorrhage, fever, and chills were less common in MRI, they showed no statistically significant difference. CONCLUSION: MRI-GB of the prostate seems to have fewer side effects and less pain intensity than TRUS-GB and was preferred by the majority of patients.
PURPOSE: We aimed to study side effects, complications, and patient acceptance of magnetic resonance imaging-guided real-time biopsy (MRI-GB) of the prostate. METHODS: Fifty-four men (49-78 years) with elevated prostate-specific antigen after at least one negative systematic transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy (TRUS-GB) were included in a prospective clinical study. Suspicious areas on images were selectively sampled by obtaining a median of four specimens (range, 1-9 specimens) using MRI-GB. In TRUS-GB, a median of 10 specimens (range, 6-14 specimens) were obtained. Telephone interviews were conducted one week after outpatientMRI-GB, asking patients about pain and side effects (hematuria, hemospermia, rectal bleeding, fever, and chills) of the two biopsy procedures and which of the two procedures they preferred. Multinomial regression analysis and Fisher's exact test was used to test for differences. RESULTS:MRI-GB was preferred by 65% (35/54), and 82% (44/54) would undergo MRI-GB again. Pain intensity (P = 0.005) and bleeding duration (P = 0.004) were significantly lower for MRI-GB compared with TRUS-GB. Hematuria was less common after MRI-GB compared with TRUS-GB (P = 0.006). A high correlation was given between bleeding intensity and bleeding duration for TRUS-GB (r=0.77) and pain intensity and pain duration for MRI-GB (r=0.65). Although hemospermia, rectal hemorrhage, fever, and chills were less common in MRI, they showed no statistically significant difference. CONCLUSION:MRI-GB of the prostate seems to have fewer side effects and less pain intensity than TRUS-GB and was preferred by the majority of patients.
Authors: H Ballentine Carter; Peter C Albertsen; Michael J Barry; Ruth Etzioni; Stephen J Freedland; Kirsten Lynn Greene; Lars Holmberg; Philip Kantoff; Badrinath R Konety; Mohammad Hassan Murad; David F Penson; Anthony L Zietman Journal: J Urol Date: 2013-05-06 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Thomas Hambrock; Diederik M Somford; Caroline Hoeks; Stefan A W Bouwense; Henkjan Huisman; Derya Yakar; Inge M van Oort; J Alfred Witjes; Jurgen J Fütterer; Jelle O Barentsz Journal: J Urol Date: 2009-12-14 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Martha M C Elwenspoek; Athena L Sheppard; Matthew D F McInnes; Samuel W D Merriel; Edward W J Rowe; Richard J Bryant; Jenny L Donovan; Penny Whiting Journal: JAMA Netw Open Date: 2019-08-02
Authors: Ji-Won Seo; Kaiyu Fu; Santiago Correa; Michael Eisenstein; Eric A Appel; Hyongsok T Soh Journal: Sci Adv Date: 2022-01-07 Impact factor: 14.136
Authors: Philipp Krausewitz; Helene Schmeller; Julian Luetkens; Darius Dabir; Jörg Ellinger; Manuel Ritter; Rupert Conrad Journal: World J Urol Date: 2022-07-14 Impact factor: 3.661
Authors: Samuel W D Merriel; Victoria Hardy; Matthew J Thompson; Fiona M Walter; Willie Hamilton Journal: J Am Coll Radiol Date: 2019-09-18 Impact factor: 5.532