Literature DB >> 31178436

Outcomes of transperineal and transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy.

K L Lo1, K L Chui1, C H Leung2, S F Ma1, K Lim1, T Ng1, J Wong1, J K M Li1, S K Mak1, C F Ng1,2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare the clinical outcomes and pathological findings of transperineal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy (TPUSPB) and transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy (TRUSPB) in a secondary referral hospital.
METHODS: This was a retrospective study of 100 TPUSPBs and 100 TRUSPBs performed in our centre. Pre-biopsy patient parameters (eg, patient age, clinical staging, serum prostate-specific antigen [PSA] level, prostate size, and PSA density), as well as pathological results and 30-day complication and readmission rates, were retrieved from the patients' medical records and compared between the two groups.
RESULTS: One hundred TPUSPBs performed from January 2018 to May 2018 and 100 TRUSPBs performed from January 2016 to April 2016 were included for analysis. Mean age did not significantly differ between the groups. The TPUSPB group had a higher mean PSA level, smaller prostate size, and higher PSA density, compared with the TRUSPB group. The overall prostate cancer detection rate was similar between the TPUSPB and TRUSPB groups (35% vs 25%, P=0.123). There were no significant differences between the groups in prostate cancer detection rates after stratification according to PSA density and clinical staging. With respect to complications, no patients developed fever in the TPUSPB group, while 4% of patients in the TRUSPB group had fever and required at least 1-week admission for intravenous antibiotic administration.
CONCLUSION: For prostate biopsy, TPUSPB is safer, with no infection complications, and has similar prostate cancer detection rate compared with TRUSPB.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Biopsy; Fever; Patient readmission; Prostate-specific antigen; Prostatic neoplasms

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31178436     DOI: 10.12809/hkmj187599

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hong Kong Med J        ISSN: 1024-2708            Impact factor:   2.227


  10 in total

1.  Infectious complications of prostate biopsy: winning battles but not war.

Authors:  Okan Derin; Limírio Fonseca; Rafael Sanchez-Salas; Matthew J Roberts
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2020-02-24       Impact factor: 4.226

2.  Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Stockholm 3 Testing Compared to PSA as the Primary Blood Test in the Prostate Cancer Diagnostic Pathway: A Decision Tree Approach.

Authors:  Bettina Wulff Risør; Nasrin Tayyari Dehbarez; Jacob Fredsøe; Karina Dalsgaard Sørensen; Bodil Ginnerup Pedersen
Journal:  Appl Health Econ Health Policy       Date:  2022-08-08       Impact factor: 3.686

3.  Comparing outcomes of transperineal to transrectal prostate biopsies performed under local anaesthesia.

Authors:  Kelven Weijing Chen; Gregory Pek; Qiao Yufei; Poh Choo Toh; Nicholas Kuek; Joe King Chien Lee; Lincoln Guan Lim Tan; Woon Chau Tsang; Edmund Chiong
Journal:  BJUI Compass       Date:  2021-10-09

4.  Endoscopic Therapy in the Management of Patients With Severe Rectal Bleeding Following Transrectal Ultrasound-Guided Prostate Biopsy: A Case-Based Systematic Review.

Authors:  Adnan Malik; Rizwan Ishtiaq; Muhammad Hassan Naeem Goraya; Faisal Inayat; Vinaya V Gaduputi
Journal:  J Investig Med High Impact Case Rep       Date:  2021 Jan-Dec

5.  Prostate biopsy techniques and pre-biopsy prophylactic measures: variation in current practice patterns in the Netherlands.

Authors:  Sofie C M Tops; Evert L Koldewijn; Diederik M Somford; Anita M P Huis; Eva Kolwijck; Heiman F L Wertheim; Marlies E J L Hulscher; J P Michiel Sedelaar
Journal:  BMC Urol       Date:  2020-03-12       Impact factor: 2.264

Review 6.  Role of Prophylactic Antibiotics in Transperineal Prostate Biopsy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Authors:  Spyridon P Basourakos; Mark N Alshak; Patrick J Lewicki; Emily Cheng; Michael Tzeng; Antonio P DeRosa; Mathew J Allaway; Ashley E Ross; Edward M Schaeffer; Hiten D Patel; Jim C Hu; Michael A Gorin
Journal:  Eur Urol Open Sci       Date:  2022-01-29

Review 7.  Transrectal Ultrasound in Prostate Cancer: Current Utilization, Integration with mpMRI, HIFU and Other Emerging Applications.

Authors:  John Panzone; Timothy Byler; Gennady Bratslavsky; Hanan Goldberg
Journal:  Cancer Manag Res       Date:  2022-03-22       Impact factor: 3.989

Review 8.  Transperineal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy: what the radiologist needs to know.

Authors:  Jack Power; Mark Murphy; Barry Hutchinson; Daragh Murphy; Michelle McNicholas; Kiaran O'Malley; John Murray; Carmel Cronin
Journal:  Insights Imaging       Date:  2022-04-25

9.  Sectoral cancer detection and tolerability of freehand transperineal prostate biopsy under local anaesthesia.

Authors:  Peter Ka-Fung Chiu; Ka-Lun Lo; Jeremy Yuen-Chun Teoh; Siu-Fai Ma; Chi-Ho Leung; Ho-Fai Wong; Kai-Man Li; Kittisak Sae-Lo; Sze-Wan Kwok; Suk-Yin Li; Chi-Hang Yee; See-Ming Hou; Chi-Fai Ng
Journal:  Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis       Date:  2020-09-30       Impact factor: 5.554

10.  IDEAL Stage 2a experience with in-office, transperineal MRI/ultrasound software fusion targeted prostate biopsy.

Authors:  Michael Tzeng; Eliza Cricco-Lizza; Bashir Al Hussein Al Awamlh; Morgan Pantuck; Daniel J Margolis; Miko Yu; Jim Hu
Journal:  BMJ Surg Interv Health Technol       Date:  2019-11-20
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.