Literature DB >> 34100650

Freehand versus Grid-Based Transperineal Prostate Biopsy: A Comparison of Anatomical Region Yield and Complications.

Ahmet Urkmez1, Cihan Demirel1, Muammer Altok1, Tharakeswara K Bathala2, Daniel D Shapiro1, John W Davis1.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The freehand (FH) technique of transperineal prostate biopsy using commercialized needle access systems facilitates a reduction in anesthesia requirements from general to local or local/sedation. We sought to compare the efficacy and complication rates of the FH method with those of the standard grid-based (GB) method.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The GB method was performed from 2014 to 2018, and the updated FH technique was performed from 2018 to 2020, yielding comparative cohorts of 174 and 304, respectively.
RESULTS: The FH and GB techniques demonstrated equivalent yields of ≥Gleason grade group (GGG)-2 prostate cancer (PCa). The FH group had a significantly higher mean number of cores with ≥GGG-2 PCa involvement (p=0.011) but a significantly lower mean number of biopsy samples (p <0.01). The urinary retention rate of the GB group (10%) was significantly higher than that of the FH group (1%; p <0.01). The rates of ≥GGG-2 PCa involvement in the anterior (GB, 31%) and anteromedial (FH, 22%) sectors were higher than those in other sectors (range, 0%-9%). For multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging, the rate of ≥GGG-2 PCa detection in the anteromedial prostate (23%) was nearly half that in other locations (range, 38%-55%).
CONCLUSIONS: Compared with GB transperineal biopsy, FH transperineal biopsy demonstrates an equivalent cancer yield with no risk of sepsis, a significantly reduced risk of urinary retention, and reduced anesthesia needs. The higher number of cores with ≥GGG-2 PCa involvement in the FH group suggests that FH transperineal biopsy can sample the prostate better than GB-transperineal biopsy can.

Entities:  

Keywords:  prostatic neoplasms

Year:  2021        PMID: 34100650     DOI: 10.1097/JU.0000000000001902

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Urol        ISSN: 0022-5347            Impact factor:   7.450


  4 in total

Review 1.  Developments in optimizing transperineal prostate biopsy.

Authors:  Emily Cheng; Meenakshi Davuluri; Patrick J Lewicki; Jim C Hu; Spyridon P Basourakos
Journal:  Curr Opin Urol       Date:  2022-01-01       Impact factor: 2.808

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.  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

4.  Local versus general anesthesia transperineal prostate biopsy: Tolerability, cancer detection, and complications.

Authors:  Donnacha Hogan; Abbie Kanagarajah; Henry H Yao; David Wetherell; Brendan Dias; Phil Dundee; Kevin Chu; Homayoun Zargar; Helen E O'Connell
Journal:  BJUI Compass       Date:  2021-09-10
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.