Literature DB >> 27659356

The association of level of practical experience in transrectal ultrasonography guided prostate biopsy with its diagnostic outcome.

S Tadtayev1, A Hussein1, L Carpenter2, N Vasdev1,2, G Boustead1.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION The diagnostic yield of transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS) guided prostate biopsy is influenced by many patient and procedure specific factors. However, the role of operator specific factors remains inadequately defined. This study investigated the association of diagnostic outcome of TRUS guided biopsy with operator skill level. METHODS This study looked at a consecutive cohort of 690 men undergoing their first extended pattern TRUS guided prostate biopsy by 27 operators over a 24-month period in a single institution. Logistic regression was used for statistical analysis. RESULTS Biopsies performed by consultants (odds ratio [OR]: 2.35, p=0.004) and senior trainees (OR: 2.37, p=0.002) in patients with prostate specific antigen levels of <10ng/ml were more likely to be positive than those performed by junior trainees (cancer detection rate 50.0%, 50.3% and 29.9% respectively). Furthermore, biopsies performed by junior trainees yielded a significantly higher proportion of prostate cancers with a Gleason score of ≥3+4 than those performed by senior trainees (OR: 2.11, p=0.031) and consultants (OR: 2.40, p=0.013) (81.4%, 67.5% and 64.6% respectively). No significant differences emerged between operator skill groups for complications, rebiopsy rates or the number of prostate cancers found during the follow-up period (median: 34 months) of patients with a negative biopsy. CONCLUSIONS Level of operator experience is associated with the diagnostic outcome of extended pattern TRUS guided biopsy. The findings of this study imply that case selection, self-audit and expert supervision for the duration of the learning curve should form the basis of biopsy training.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Biopsy; Operator effect; Prostate cancer; Prostate specific antigen; Transrectal ultrasonography

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27659356      PMCID: PMC5450273          DOI: 10.1308/rcsann.2016.0308

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl        ISSN: 0035-8843            Impact factor:   1.891


  25 in total

1.  Can a trained non-physician provider perform transrectal ultrasound-guided prostatic biopsies as effectively as an experienced urologist?

Authors:  Satoshi Hori; Oliver Fuge; Kay Trabucchi; Peter Donaldson; John McLoughlin
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2012-06-21       Impact factor: 5.588

Review 2.  Diagnosis and treatment of prostate cancer: summary of NICE guidance.

Authors:  John Graham; Mark Baker; Fergus Macbeth; Victoria Titshall
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2008-03-15

3.  The learning curve of transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsies: implications for training programs.

Authors:  Amine Benchikh El Fegoun; Rabii El Atat; Laurence Choudat; Elie El Helou; Jean-François Hermieu; Sébastien Dominique; Vincent Hupertan; Vincent Ravery
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 2.649

4.  Complication rates and risk factors of 5802 transrectal ultrasound-guided sextant biopsies of the prostate within a population-based screening program.

Authors:  René Raaijmakers; Wim J Kirkels; Monique J Roobol; Mark F Wildhagen; Fritz H Schrder
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2002-11       Impact factor: 2.649

5.  Prostate size and risk of high-grade, advanced prostate cancer and biochemical progression after radical prostatectomy: a search database study.

Authors:  Stephen J Freedland; William B Isaacs; Elizabeth A Platz; Martha K Terris; William J Aronson; Christopher L Amling; Joseph C Presti; Christopher J Kane
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2005-10-20       Impact factor: 44.544

6.  The incidence of hyperechoic prostate cancer in transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy specimens.

Authors:  Borislav Spajic; Hrvoje Eupic; Davor Tomas; Goran Stimac; Bozo Kruslin; Ognjen Kraus
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2007-10       Impact factor: 2.649

7.  Operator is an independent predictor of detecting prostate cancer at transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy.

Authors:  Nathan Lawrentschuk; Ants Toi; Gina A Lockwood; Andrew Evans; Antonio Finelli; Martin O'Malley; Myles Margolis; Sangeet Ghai; Neil E Fleshner
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 7.450

8.  Outcome analysis and patient satisfaction following octant transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy: a prospective study comparing consultant urologist, specialist registrar and nurse practitioner in urology.

Authors:  A Henderson; D E Andrich; M E Pietrasik; D Higgins; B Montgomery; S E M Langley
Journal:  Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis       Date:  2004       Impact factor: 5.554

9.  Random systematic versus directed ultrasound guided transrectal core biopsies of the prostate.

Authors:  K K Hodge; J E McNeal; M K Terris; T A Stamey
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  1989-07       Impact factor: 7.450

10.  Prostate cancer testing following a negative prostate biopsy: over testing the elderly.

Authors:  Richard M Hoffman; Thomas Denberg; William C Hunt; Ann S Hamilton
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2007-06-07       Impact factor: 5.128

View more
  6 in total

1.  Transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy performed by supervised junior and senior residents is safe and does not result in inferior outcomes.

Authors:  Jesse F Wang; Margaret A Knoedler; Kimberly A Maciolek; Natasza M Posielski; Vania Lopez; Wade A Bushman; Sara L Best; Dan R Gralnek; Kyle A Richards
Journal:  Am J Clin Exp Urol       Date:  2021-02-15

2.  Magnetic resonance imaging/transrectal ultrasonography fusion guided seed placement in a phantom: Accuracy between 2-seed versus 1-seed strategies.

Authors:  Qian Li; Yu Duan; Masoud Baikpour; Theodore T Pierce; Colin J McCarthy; Ashraf Thabet; Suk-Tak Chan; Anthony E Samir
Journal:  Eur J Radiol       Date:  2020-06-10       Impact factor: 3.528

3.  Predictors of clinically significant prostate cancer in biopsy-naïve and prior negative biopsy men with a negative prostate MRI: improving MRI-based screening with a novel risk calculator.

Authors:  Luigi A M J G van Riel; Auke Jager; Dennie Meijer; Arnoud W Postema; Ruth S Smit; André N Vis; Theo M de Reijke; Harrie P Beerlage; Jorg R Oddens
Journal:  Ther Adv Urol       Date:  2022-03-26

4.  An optimized prostate biopsy strategy in patients with a unilateral lesion on prostate magnetic resonance imaging avoids unnecessary biopsies.

Authors:  Auke Jager; Luigi A M J G van Riel; Arnoud W Postema; Theo M de Reijke; Tim M van der Sluis; Jorg R Oddens
Journal:  Ther Adv Urol       Date:  2022-07-26

5.  Factors Influencing Variability in the Performance of Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Detecting Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Literature Review.

Authors:  Armando Stabile; Francesco Giganti; Veeru Kasivisvanathan; Gianluca Giannarini; Caroline M Moore; Anwar R Padhani; Valeria Panebianco; Andrew B Rosenkrantz; Georg Salomon; Baris Turkbey; Geert Villeirs; Jelle O Barentsz
Journal:  Eur Urol Oncol       Date:  2020-03-17

Review 6.  The challenge of prostate biopsy guidance in the era of mpMRI detected lesion: ultrasound-guided versus in-bore biopsy.

Authors:  Auke Jager; Joan C Vilanova; Massimo Michi; Hessel Wijkstra; Jorg R Oddens
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2021-07-29       Impact factor: 3.039

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.