Literature DB >> 32124525

Comparison of complications after transrectal and transperineal prostate biopsy: a national population-based study.

Brendan Berry1,2, Matthew G Parry1,2, Arunan Sujenthiran2, Julie Nossiter2, Thomas E Cowling1,2, Ajay Aggarwal3,4, Paul Cathcart5, Heather Payne6, Jan van der Meulen1,2, Noel Clarke7.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To assess the complications of transrectal (TR) compared to transperineal prostate (TP) biopsies. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Men diagnosed with prostate cancer between 1 April 2014 and 31 March 2017 in England were identified in the National Prostate Cancer Audit. Administrative hospital data were then used to categorize the type of prostate biopsy and subsequent complications requiring hospital admission. Administrative hospital data were used to identify patients staying overnight immediately after biopsy and those readmitted separately for hospital admissions because of sepsis, urinary retention or haematuria. Procedure-related mortality and total length of hospital stay within 30 days were also recorded. Generalized linear models were used to calculate adjusted risk differences (aRDs).
RESULTS: A total of 73 630 patients undergoing prostate biopsy were identified. Those undergoing TP biopsy (n = 13 723) were more likely to have an overnight hospital stay (12.3% vs 2.4%; aRD 9.7%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 7.1-12.3), were less likely to be readmitted because of sepsis (1.0% vs 1.4%; aRD -0.4%, CI -0.6 to -0.2), and were more likely to be readmitted with urinary retention (1.9% vs 1.0%; aRD 1.1%, CI 0.7-1.4) than those undergoing a TR biopsy (n = 59 907). There were no significant differences in the risk of haematuria or mortality.
CONCLUSIONS: Our results showed that TP biopsy had a lower risk of readmission for sepsis but a higher risk of readmission for urinary retention than TR biopsy. Use of the TP route would prevent one readmission for sepsis in 278 patients at the cost of three additional patients readmitted for urinary retention.
© 2020 The Authors BJU International © 2020 BJU International Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  #PCSM; #ProstateCancer; prostate biopsy; prostate cancer; transperineal; transrectal

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32124525     DOI: 10.1111/bju.15039

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BJU Int        ISSN: 1464-4096            Impact factor:   5.588


  13 in total

1.  Transrectal versus transperineal prostate biopsy under intravenous anaesthesia: a clinical, microbiological and cost analysis of 2048 cases over 11 years at a tertiary institution.

Authors:  Matthew J Roberts; Alastair Macdonald; Sachinka Ranasinghe; Harrison Bennett; Patrick E Teloken; Patrick Harris; David Paterson; Geoff Coughlin; Nigel Dunglison; Rachel Esler; Robert A Gardiner; Thomas Elliott; Louisa Gordon; John Yaxley
Journal:  Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis       Date:  2020-08-05       Impact factor: 5.554

Review 2.  Pooled outcomes of performing freehand transperineal prostate biopsy with the PrecisionPoint Transperineal Access System.

Authors:  Michael Tzeng; Spyridon P Basourakos; Hiten D Patel; Matthew J Allaway; Jim C Hu; Michael A Gorin
Journal:  BJUI Compass       Date:  2022-06-28

3.  E. coli bacterial meningitis after transrectal prostate biopsy under antibiotic prophylaxis: a case report and literature review.

Authors:  Tom Vandewalle; Kathy Vander Eeckt; Steven Deconinck; Emmanuel Weyne; Pieter Verpoort; Dieter Ost
Journal:  Clin Case Rep       Date:  2022-05-27

Review 4.  Rationale and protocol for randomized study of transrectal and transperineal prostate biopsy efficacy and complications (ProBE-PC study).

Authors:  Badar M Mian; Ronald P Kaufman; Hugh A G Fisher
Journal:  Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis       Date:  2021-03-25       Impact factor: 5.554

5.  Safety and feasibility of freehand transperineal prostate biopsy under local anesthesia: Our initial experience.

Authors:  Ananthakrishnan Sivaraman; Vasantharaja Ramasamy; P Aarthy; Vinoth Sankar; P B Sivaraman
Journal:  Indian J Urol       Date:  2022-01-01

Review 6.  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 7.  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

Review 8.  A cross-section of UK prostate cancer diagnostics during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) era - a shifting paradigm?

Authors:  Luke Stroman; Paul Cathcart; Alastair Lamb; Ben Challacombe; Rick Popert
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2020-10-28       Impact factor: 5.969

Review 9.  Evaluation and Management of Genitourinary Emergencies in Patients with Cancer.

Authors:  Demis N Lipe; Phillip B Mann; Rodrick Babakhanlou; Maria T Cruz Carreras; A Guido Hita; Monica K Wattana
Journal:  Emerg Med Int       Date:  2021-07-27       Impact factor: 1.112

Review 10.  Optimal biopsy approach for detection of clinically significant prostate cancer.

Authors:  Simona Ippoliti; Peter Fletcher; Luca Orecchia; Roberto Miano; Christof Kastner; Tristan Barrett
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2021-08-06       Impact factor: 3.039

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.