RESUMEN

For many years, transrectal ultrasound-guided (TRUS) prostate biopsies have been performed to establish a histological diagnosis of prostate cancer. This has been the recommended standard of care procedure, but has always carried risks, in particular the risk of post-procedural sepsis, and the associated antibiotic burden and risk of development of antibiotic resistance. Transperineal (TP) prostate biopsies performed under local anaesthetic (LA) have been proposed as a possible solution to these issues, with potentially lower infectious complications, and avoidance of need for antibiotic prophylaxis. The European Association of Urology produced guidance in 2023 with 'weak' recommendations in favour of LATP biopsy as a new standard of care, citing its safety profile. Both the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence in the UK, and the American Urological Association in the United States, have concluded for now that the body of evidence is inadequate and not offered a similar recommendation. We discuss the available evidence, pros and cons of each technique, and the status of current trials in the field. We believe that clinical equipoise remains necessary, given the disparity in national and international guidelines highlighting the need for large randomised controlled trials to answer the question: is LATP biopsy really better than TRUS biopsy?

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: Prostate biopsy is central to the accurate histological diagnosis of prostate cancer. In current practice, the biopsy procedure can be performed using a transrectal or transperineal route with different technologies available for targeting of lesions within the prostate. Historically, the biopsy procedure was performed solely by urologists, but with the advent of image-guided techniques, the involvement of radiologists in prostate biopsy has become more common. Herein, we discuss the pros, cons and future considerations regarding their ongoing role. METHODS: A narrative review regarding the current evidence was completed. PubMed and Cochrane central register of controlled trials were search until January 2024. All study types were of consideration if published after 2000 and an English language translation was available. RESULTS: There are no published studies that directly compare outcomes of prostate biopsy when performed by a urologist or radiologist. In all published studies regarding the learning curve for prostate biopsy, the procedure was performed by urologists. These studies suggest that the learning curve for prostate biopsy is between 10 and 50 cases to reach proficiency in terms of prostate cancer detection and complications. It is recognised that many urologists are poorly able to accurately interpret multi parametric (mp)-MRI of the prostate. Collaboration between the specialities is of importance with urology offering the advantage of being involved in prior and future care of the patient while radiology has the advantage of being able to expertly interpret preprocedure MRI. CONCLUSION: There is no evidence to suggest that prostate biopsy should be solely performed by a specific specialty. The most important factor remains knowledge of the relevant anatomy and sufficient volume of cases to develop and maintain skills.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The transrectal biopsy approach is traditionally used to detect prostate cancer. An alternative transperineal approach is historically performed under general anesthesia, but recent advances enable transperineal biopsy to be performed under local anesthesia. We sought to compare infectious complications of transperineal biopsy without antibiotic prophylaxis versus transrectal biopsy with targeted prophylaxis. METHODS: We assigned biopsy-naïve participants to undergo transperineal biopsy without antibiotic prophylaxis versus transrectal biopsy with targeted prophylaxis (rectal culture screening for fluoroquinolone-resistant bacteria and antibiotic targeting to culture and sensitivity results) through a multicenter, randomized trial. The primary outcome was post-biopsy infection captured by a prospective medical review and patient report on a 7-d survey. The secondary outcomes included cancer detection, noninfectious complications, and a numerical rating scale (0-10) for biopsy-related pain and discomfort during and 7-d after biopsy. KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS: A total of 658 participants were randomized, with zero transperineal versus four (1.4%) transrectal biopsy infections (difference -1.4%; 95% confidence interval [CI] -3.2%, 0.3%; p = 0.059). The rates of other complications were very low and similar. Importantly, detection of clinically significant cancer was similar (53% transperineal vs 50% transrectal, adjusted difference 2.0%; 95% CI -6.0, 10). Participants in the transperineal arm experienced worse periprocedural pain (0.6 adjusted difference [0-10 scale], 95% CI 0.2, 0.9), but the effect was small and resolved by 7-d. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Office-based transperineal biopsy is tolerable, does not compromise cancer detection, and did not result in infectious complications. Transrectal biopsy with targeted prophylaxis achieved similar infection rates, but requires rectal cultures and careful attention to antibiotic selection and administration. Consideration of these factors and antibiotic stewardship should guide clinical decision-making. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this multicenter randomized trial, we compare prostate biopsy infectious complications for the transperineal versus transrectal approach. The absence of infectious complications with transperineal biopsy without the use of preventative antibiotics is noteworthy, but not significantly different from transrectal biopsy with targeted antibiotic prophylaxis.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Background: The beneficial effect of virtual reality (VR) on pain management in the context of transrectal MRI-guided prostate biopsy is not well established. However, it remains unclear whether an adjunctive of VR also improves pain management. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of VR as adjunctive in pain management in transrectal MRI-guided prostate biopsy (PB). Methods: We retrospectively evaluated the pain intensity incidence in the 153 patients with PB indication (of which 102 were naïve of PB) who were admitted to our hospital since the acquisition of the Healthy Mind virtual reality headset on 19 January 2021. Results: Baseline characteristics of patients who received local anesthesia with 1% lidocaine periprostatic nerve block (PPNB) (Group SOC, N = 78) and patients who received VR associated with PPNB (Group VR, N = 75) were largely similar. One PB with general anesthesia was excluded. The mean pain score at day zero was respectively 3.4 (±2.5) and 2.9 (±2.3) for SOC and VR (p = 0.203). However, the mean pain score at day zero was significantly lower in naïve PB patients with VR [2.7 (±2.0)] than in naïve PB patients with SOC [3.8 (±2.5), p = 0.012] when patients were stratified in PB status. Similar results were found on day 3 for the analysis including naïve-PB patients with SOC vs. with VR [0.4 (±2.5) vs. 0.2 (±2.0); p = 0.023)]. Conclusions: The pain intensity was significantly lower in naïve PB patients with VR than in naïve PB patients with SOC. There were no side effects from VR and tolerability was excellent.

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: The purpose of this research is to evaluate the compatibility of the pathological grading of prostate carcinoma in transrectal biopsy sample (TRUS), Gleason scores 3 + 3 = 6, and a palpable nodule in digital rectal examination (DRE) with radical prostatectomy samples in patients with prostate cancer. METHODS: Sixty-one patients with prostate cancer were included. Transrectal biopsy of the prostate and Gleason score were recorded in the histopathological report of the radical prostatectomy sample independently for each patient. RESULTS: The mean ± standard deviation of PSA level in patients was 8.52 ± 2.23. The average prostate volume was 46.0 ± 12.17 ml. The average density of PSA was 20.06 ± 7.74 ml. The results revealed that 36% of the people after surgery had similar pathology compared to the score before surgery (Gleason score 3 + 3 = 6) while 64% had non-homogeneous reporting (Gleason score 3 + 4 = 7 and other results). The study showed that low prostate volume before surgery was associated with a higher Gleason score after surgery. Although there was no significant relationship between PSA level above 10 before surgery and higher Gleason scores after surgery, there was a statistically significant relationship between PSA density above 15% and higher Gleason scores after surgery (P < 0.001). PSA density was a strong predictor for postoperative Gleason score (P = 0.004). CONCLUSION: The high level of PSA density before surgery increased the risk of higher Gleason scores after surgery by 95.99%. Over 64% of the individuals had inconsistency in tumor upgrading, and the palpable firm nodule in the DRE should not be ignored.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Transrectal (TR) ultrasound guided prostate biopsy and transperineal (TP) ultrasound guided prostate biopsy are the two most commonly used methods to detect prostate cancer, the detection rate of the two biopsy approaches may differ in patients with different clinical characteristics. Here we aimed to compare the prostate cancer detection rate and positive rate of biopsy cores between TR and TP prostate biopsy in patients with different clinical characteristics. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed and compared the clinical data of 452 patients underwent TR or TP prostate biopsy in our hospital from June 2017 to September 2021. And patients were stratified according to several clinical characteristic (serum PSA level, prostate volume, PSA density, T stage and ISUP grade), cancer detection rate and positive rate of biopsy cores were compared in different stratified groups. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in age, PSA level, prostate volume, and PSA density between the TR and TP groups. TR group had a higher overall cancer detection rate and positive rate of biopsy cores than TP group. Further subgroup analysis showed that TR group had a higher cancer detection rate in patients with prostate volumes 30-80 mL, and that the TR group had a higher positive rate of biopsy cores among the patients with T3-T4 stages, while TP group had a higher positive rates of biopsy cores among the patients with T1-T2 stages. There were no significant differences between the TR and TP groups for each subgroup when stratified by PSA level, PSA density and ISUP grade. CONCLUSIONS: TR approach may have advantage in patients with prostate volumes 30-80 mL and T3-T4 stages, while TP approach may have advantage in patients with T1-T2 stages.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Evidence of transperineal (TP) superiority over transrectal (TR) biopsy is growing due to lower infectious complication rates. However, TR biopsy is the most common procedure, and it seems that a cross-over to TP is delayed by logistical challenges such as costs, complexity, and lack of experience. We investigate whether well-selected patients without any risk factors may further undergo TR biopsy if all precautions to avoid infections are warranted. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data were collected in our academic institution between August 2021 and March 2022 and after clinical implementation of the currently updated European Association of Urology guideline recommendations on the performance of prostate biopsy. Patients underwent either TP or TR biopsy according to a riskstratification based on risk factors of infectious complications. Follow-up asked for post-biopsy complications. Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting (IPTW) propensity score was used to balance baseline characteristics. Complications were subdivided into infectious and non-infectious complications. RESULTS: In total, 294 patients were included with 161 patients undergoing TR vs. 133 patients undergoing TP biopsy. Complication rates were 2.2% for TP vs. 5.5% for TR biopsy concerning all complications. Infectious complication rates only were 0.7% for TP vs. 1.8% for TR biopsy. After IPTW adjustment, differences were statistically significant different (p = 0.01). CONCLUSION: Our study revealed that even in a well-selected patient cohort with presumably lower risk of infectious complications, TR biopsy leads to more post-biopsy complications than TP biopsy. This conclusion should motivate the urological community to switch to TP biopsy.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

La malacoplaquia es un proceso inflamatorio crónico causado por un defecto lisosomal en la digestión bacteriana. El trastorno, aunque raro, aparece con mayor frecuencia en pacientes con disfunción inmunitaria y en aparato genitourinario. La vejiga es el sitio más comúnmente afectado, aunque se han informado casos con involucro de otros órganos, incluyendo la glándula prostática. Desde una perspectiva clínica, la lesión puede simular tumores malignos durante la exploración física y en estudios de imagen, en particular en próstata, por lo que el diagnóstico diferencial suele ser desafiante. Su expresión morfológica se caracteriza histológicamente por agregados histiocíticos con inclusiones basófilas intracitoplasmáticas, compuestas por sales de calcio y hierro. Se presenta un caso que fue diagnosticado en biopsia transrectal como adenocarcinoma acinar con suma de Gleason 5 + 5 = 10. En la prostatectomía se evidenció la asociación excepcional de malacoplaquia prostática difusa y un foco de adenocarcinoma acinar Gleason 3 + 4 = 7.(AU)

Malakoplakia is a chronic inflammatory process caused by a lysosomal defect in bacterial digestion. Although rare, it occurs more frequently in the genitourinary tract and in patients with immune dysfunction. The bladder is the most commonly affected site, although cases have been reported in other organs, including the prostate gland. Clinically, this lesion can be confused with malignant tumours, both on physical examination and imagining techniques. This is particularly pronounced in the prostate, making the differential diagnosis challenging. Histologically, characteristic aggregates of histiocytes with basophilic intracytoplasmic inclusions composed of calcium and iron salts are found. We present a case diagnosed on transrectal biopsy as acinar adenocarcinoma with a Gleason 5 + 5 = 10 score. Prostatectomy revealed an unusual association of diffuse prostate malakoplakia and an area of acinar adenocarcinoma with a Gleason score of 3 + 4 = 7.(AU)

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Malakoplakia is a chronic inflammatory process caused by a lysosomal defect in bacterial digestion. Although rare, it occurs more frequently in the genitourinary tract and in patients with immune dysfunction. The bladder is the most commonly affected site, although cases have been reported in other organs, including the prostate gland. Clinically, this lesion can be confused with malignant tumours, both on physical examination and imagining techniques. This is particularly pronounced in the prostate, making the differential diagnosis challenging. Histologically, characteristic aggregates of histiocytes with basophilic intracytoplasmic inclusions composed of calcium and iron salts are found. We present a case diagnosed on transrectal biopsy as acinar adenocarcinoma with a Gleason 5 + 5 = 10 score. Prostatectomy revealed an unusual association of diffuse prostate malakoplakia and an area of acinar adenocarcinoma with a Gleason score of 3 + 4 = 7.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: In recent years, transperineal biopsies gained popularity for prostate cancer diagnosis; lower infective complications and improved sampling of the prostate are the main advantages of this technique. One question that remains unclear is whether an initial transperineal biopsy confers a lower risk for rebiopsy compared with the transrectal approach. METHODS: Six hundred seventy-one men were prospectively followed after an initial negative prostate biopsy for a median period of 49.50 (IQR: 37.62-61.17) months. Rebiopsy rate was analyzed attending to first biopsy approach (transrectal versus transperineal systematic) and clinical variables. RESULTS: Diagnostic rate was similar for transrectal and transperineal systematic biopsies. Targeted biopsies outperformed any systematic approach, and transperineal targeted in particular was superior to transrectal targeted. Rebiopsy rates were 15.4% and 5.26% for the transrectal and transperineal systematic groups, respectively. Prostate-specific antigen density and type of first biopsy were identified as rebiopsy predictors. CONCLUSION: Men undergoing transperineal systematic biopsies had a three times lower rate of rebiopsy over the study period compared with the traditional transrectal approach. This advantage could be added to the already described potential benefits of transperineal biopsies. Targeted biopsies had lower rebiopsy rate over the study period. Further innovations that decreased the cost of transperineal biopsies could favor this approach in the future.

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: To report the prospective multicentre clinical evaluation of a first-in-man disposable device, Cambridge Prostate Biopsy Device, to undertake local anaesthetic outpatient transperineal prostate biopsies. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Disposable single-use Cambridge Prostate Biopsy devices were manufactured based on a previous prototype. The lead site developed a user training course and disseminated the method to other sites. The Cambridge Prostate Biopsy Device (CamPROBE) was offered as an alternative to transrectal ultrasound guided biopsy to men due for a biopsy as part of their clinical management. Data on safety (infections and device performance), clinical utility, patient reported experience, biopsy quality and cancer detection were collected. Procedure time and local anaesthetic use was recorded in the lead site. The study was funded by a United Kingdom National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) i4i product development award. RESULTS: A total of 40 patients were recruited (median age 69 y) across six sites; five sites were new to the procedure. Overall, 19/40 were first prostate biopsies and 21/40 repeat procedures. Both image-targeted and systematic biopsy cores taken. There were no infections, device deficiencies or safety issues reported. The procedure was well tolerated with excellent patient-reported perception and low pain scores (median of 3, scale 0-10). Histopathology quality was good and the overall cancer diagnosis rate (first diagnostic procedures) was 68% (13/19) and for significant cancers (⩾ histological Grade Group 2), 47% (9/19). In the lead centre (most experienced), median procedure time was 25 minutes, and median local anaesthetic use 11 ml (n=17). CONCLUSIONS: Data from this device evaluation study demonstrate that the United Kingdom-developed Cambridge Prostate Biopsy Device/method for transperineal biopsies is safe, transferable and maintains high diagnostic yields. The procedure is well tolerated by patients, suited to the local anaesthetic outpatient setting and could directly replace transrectal ultrasound guided biopsy. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The clinical landscape of prostate biopsy (PB) is evolving with changes in procedures and techniques. Moreover, antibiotic resistance is increasing and influences the efficacy of pre-biopsy prophylactic regimens. Therefore, increasing antibiotic resistance may impact on clinical care, which probably results in differences between hospitals. The objective of our study is to determine the (variability in) current practices of PB in the Netherlands and to gain insight into Dutch urologists' perceptions of fluoroquinolone resistance and biopsy related infections. METHODS: An online questionnaire was prepared using SurveyMonkey® platform and distributed to all 420 members of the Dutch Association of Urology, who work in 81 Dutch hospitals. Information about PB techniques and periprocedural antimicrobial prophylaxis was collected. Urologists' perceptions regarding pre-biopsy antibiotic prophylaxis in an era of antibiotic resistance was assessed. Descriptive statistical analysis was performed. RESULTS: One hundred sixty-one responses (38.3%) were analyzed representing 65 (80.3%) of all Dutch hospitals performing PB. Transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy (TRUSPB) was performed in 64 (98.5%) hospitals. 43.1% of the hospitals (also) used other image-guided biopsy techniques. Twenty-three different empirical prophylactic regimens were reported among the hospitals. Ciprofloxacin was most commonly prescribed (84.4%). The duration ranged from one pre-biopsy dose (59.4%) to 5 days extended prophylaxis. 25.2% of the urologists experienced ciprofloxacin resistance as a current problem in the prevention of biopsy related infections and 73.6% as a future problem. CONCLUSIONS: There is a wide variation in practice patterns among Dutch urologists. TRUSPB is the most commonly used biopsy technique, but other image-guided biopsy techniques are increasingly used. Antimicrobial prophylaxis is not standardized and prolonged prophylaxis is common. The wide variation in practice patterns and lack of standardization underlines the need for evidence-based recommendations to guide urologists in choosing appropriate antimicrobial prophylaxis for PB in the context of increasing antibiotic resistance.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy (TRBx) or transperineal Bx (TPBx) are considered alternative approaches for the diagnosis of prostate cancer (PCa). However, urinary tract infection (UTI) or other complications could be more frequent in the TRBx approach. OBJECTIVE: To determine the complication rate following different antimicrobial prophylaxis (AMP; fosfomycin trometamol [FT] vs ß-lactame or fluorochinolones [FQ]) in patients undergoing TRBx or TPBx. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The analyses were based on prospectively collected data of a cohort of patients who underwent TRBx or TPBx for elevated prostate-specific antigen (PSA; ≥4ng/ml) or clinical suspicion of PCa, between September 2016 and March 2017. Patients received a single dose of 3g oral FT (group A) or, alternatively, FQ or ß-lactame (group B). INTERVENTION: TRBx versus TPBx. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Adjustment variables consisted of age, PSA, biopsy technique (TPBx vs TRBx), and antibiotic prophylaxis (FT vs ß-lactame or FQ) using 1:1 propensity-score matching. Overall, 526 patients were considered, of whom 258 received FT (group A) and the other 258 received ß-lactame or FQ (group B). RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Overall complications occurred in 390 (75.58%) and major complications in 67/516 (12.98%). Lower prevalence of UTIs was detected in group A (34.1%) compared with that in group B (43.4%; p=0.03), while similar rates of haematuria (54.7% vs 55.4%), haemospermia (39.5% vs 33.0%), and acute urinary retention (11.6% vs 9.3%) were detected in groups A and B. We found that group B (odds ratio [OR]: 1.54; p=0.03), I grade haematuria (OR: 6.17; p<0.01), and II grade haematuria (OR: 5.13; p<0.01) were significantly associated with increased risk of UTIs. CONCLUSIONS: AMP with fluoroquinoles or ß-lactam antibiotics increased the rate of UTIs, when compared with FT, in patients undergoing TRBx or TPBx. The appearance of haematuria or haemospermia is associated with UTIs, suggesting the possibility of tailoring the strategy for prophylaxis in this category of patients. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this study, comparing complications after transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy versus transperineal biopsy, prophylaxis with fluoroquinoles or ß-lactam antibiotics increased the rate of urinary tract infections when compared with fosfomycin trometamol, regardless of the type of biopsy approach.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study was to determine the effectiveness and harms of periprostatic block compared with other interventions in patients with clinically suspected prostate cancer who underwent transrectal biopsy to diminish pain. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We included only clinical trials which involved male adults older than 18 years-old suspected of having prostate cancer. The intervention performed was a periprostatic block and the comparators were topical anesthetics, sedatives, placebo/no intervention or combined therapies. The primary outcome was perianal or perineal pain and serious adverse effects (SAE). Literature search was conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, CENTRAL and non-published literature from inception to March 2019. We performed a network meta-analysis in R. RESULTS: We included 43 studies in the meta-analysis. Thirteen studies compared periprostatic block vs. placebo/no intervention (the most frequent). Most of the studies had an unclear risk of bias for selection, performance and detection bias and low risk for attrition, reporting and other bias. Periprostatic block (lidocaine) + intrarectal gel (lidocaine + prilocaine) vs. periprostatic block (lidocaine) showed an RR -0.9 (95%CI - 1.9 to 0.074); intrarectal gel (lidocaine) vs. periprostatic block (lidocaine) had a RR 0.77 (95%CI 0.14 to 1.4); placebo/no intervention vs. periprostatic block (lidocaine) + intrarectal gel (lidocaine+prilocaine) RR 3 (95%CI 1.9 to 4); intrarectal gel (lidocaine) versus periprostatic block (lidocaine) + intrarectal gel (lidocaine + prilocaine) RR 1.7 (95%CI 0.64 to 2.7). CONCLUSIONS: The blockage of the periprostatic plexus in the performance of a transrectal ultrasound-guided prostatic biopsy, alone or in combination with intrarectal analgesia or sedation, is an effective method to reduce pain.

RESUMEN

AIM: To examine the structure of the prostate tissue in patients with III B chronic prostatitis (CP) and chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CPPS). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study analyzed transrectal fine-needle biopsy specimens of 10 patients with the verified diagnosis of chronic pelvic pain syndrome/category III B chronic prostatitis (CPPS/IIIB CP) according to the National Institutes of Health classification. Tissues were examined using light and electron microscopy, and immunohistochemical study of the expression of CD31, CD34, NSE and S-100 markers. RESULTS: All biopsy specimens of all patients showed fibroplastic changes of the prostate tissue most markedly pronounced in the stroma and muscle fibers in the form of total fibrosis, myofibril atrophy, and extracellular lipofuscin deposition. The examination revealed a significant reduction in the density of microcirculatory bed vessels and arteriolar luminal stenosis, a reduction in the number of nerve fibers, and compression of their fibrous tissue. No inflammatory changes were found in the prostate. DISCUSSION: In patients with CPPS/IIIB CP, the changes in the prostate at the microscopic and ultrastructural levels are characteristic of severe chronic tissue hypoxia, which leads to the development of fibrosis resulting in stenosis of microcirculatory bed vessels and degenerative changes in nerve fibers and cells. No signs of an inflammatory reaction in the examined tissue were established. CONCLUSION: Changes in the prostate tissue in CPPS/IIIB CP suggest the presence of chronic pelvic ischemia and exclude its association with inflammation as the main pathological process.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: Prostate biopsy (pbx) is the most common outpatient procedure in urology. Complications are urinary tract infections, including hospitalization and sepsis. Recommendations on antibiotic prophylaxis (apx) are scarce, and healthcare data are not available. The study addressed the following endpoints: the duration and spectrum of antimicrobial prophylaxis in transrectal and transperineal pbx in the hospital and the practice setting. METHODS: A questionnaire compiled data about age, gender, board certification, and place of work. Information about the frequency of pbx, duration and type of apx, usage of disinfecting lubricant, and urine or rectal swab cultures was collected. The study refers to German urologists. RESULTS: Overall 478 urologists answered the questionnaire. 15.5% (74) of respondents were residents. 50.8% (243) of urologists work in a practice; the rest in a hospital. Only 4.8% do not perform pbx. Transrectal pbx are performed a median of two times a week. The majority (446, 98%) prescribe an apx, mostly fluoroquinolones (407, 89.5%). In total, 10.1% (46) of the participants use a single-shot-apx. apx has a median duration of 4 days. One-third uses a disinfecting lubricant. Urine and rectal swab cultures are analyzed by 45.5% (207) and 24.4% (111), respectively. CONCLUSION: Most urologists prescribe an extended apx for both transrectal and transperineal pbx. Perineal pbx is still a deviation from everyday practice and not an established alternative to transrectal pbx. Urologists are aware of the increasing fluoroquinolone-resistance and are adapting with rectal swab and urine cultures. Further studies need to evaluate alternatives to 5-day apx and results should be addressed in our guidelines. This is of importance in light of the increasing resistance rates and fluoroquinolone side effects.

RESUMEN

Background/Aims/Objectives: Our aim was to evaluate the accuracy of systematic transperineal sector mapping biopsy (TPSMB) in predicting Gleason score (GS) at radical prostatectomy (RP), to compare its accuracy with standard transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsies (TRUS) and to establish the clinical impact of discordance between biopsies and RP on subsequent surgical management. METHODS: Two hundred fifty-five patients from 2008 to 2013 who underwent RP following TPSMB (n = 204) or TRUS (n = 51), were included in this retrospective multi-institutional study. Concordance between biopsies and RPs GS was assessed both as percentages and with Cohen's Kappa coefficient. All mismatches between biopsies and RP were assessed for significance by 3 urologists using the Delphi method. RESULTS: No differences were present among the groups. Concordance between biopsy and RP GS was 75.49% for TPSMB and 64.70% for TRUS. Kappa coefficient was 0.42 and 0.39 respectively. The Delphi method showed lower clinical impact of GS discordances for TPSMB with 7.8% of patients having significant change, thus being potentially more suitable for other treatment modalities, compared to TRUS (13.7%). CONCLUSIONS: TPSMB had a higher accuracy for predicting the GS grade at RP showing superior GS concordance compared with standard TRUS. TPSMB provides an effective technique for systematic prostate biopsy to evaluate overall prostate cancer GS.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: To evaluate the detection rate for clinically significant prostate cancer (PCa) of transperineal (TP) versus transrectal (TR) multiparametric (mp) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)/transrectal ultrasound-guided (TRUS) fusion targeted biopsy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From January 2015 to January 2016, a total of 200 men (median age, 61 years) with negative digital rectal examination findings underwent repeat saturation TP prostate biopsy (SPBx; median 30 cores) for increasing or persistent elevated prostate-specific antigen values. Ten day before SPBx, all patients underwent 3.0 T pelvic mpMRI (Achieva 3T; Philips Healthcare Best, Netherlands). In the presence of mpMRI lesions suggestive of cancer (Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System [PI-RADS] score 4/5), targeted mpMRI/TRUS TR fusion guided biopsies (4 cores) and TP cognitive biopsies (4 cores) were added to SPBx. RESULTS: Median prostate-specific antigen was 8.6 ng/mL, and mpMRI revealed a suspicious lesion in 95 (47.5%) of 200 cases. Overall, in 60 (30%) of 200 men, a clinically significant PCa was found, and in all cases, mpMRI was positive. SPBx, TR fusion, and mpMRI/TRUS TP cognitive targeted biopsy diagnosed 59 (98.3%), 40 (78.3%), and 56 (93.3%) clinically significant PCa, respectively. TR fusion versus TP targeted biopsy missed 12 versus 1 (P = .001) cancers of the anterior zone and 8 versus 3 (P = .12) cancers of the peripheric gland, respectively; moreover, PCa diagnosed by TR fusion versus TP targeted biopsy had a mpMRI lesion diameter and percentage of positive cores equal to 13 versus 10 mm and 33% versus 58% (P = .001), respectively. CONCLUSION: mpMRI/TRUS TP cognitive targeted biopsy found a greater percentage of clinically significant PCa of the anterior zone compared to the mpMRI/TRUS TR fusion approach (93.3% vs. 25%; P = .0001).

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate how accurate a 12-core transrectal biopsy derived low-risk prostate cancer diagnosis is for an active surveillance programme by comparing the histological outcome with that from confirmatory transperineal sector biopsy. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: The cohort included 166 men diagnosed with low volume Gleason score 3+3 prostate cancer on initial transrectal biopsy who also underwent a confirmatory biopsy. Both biopsy techniques were performed according to standard protocols and samples were taken for histopathology analysis. Subgroup analysis was performed according to disease severity at baseline to determine possible disease parameters of upgrading at confirmatory biopsy. RESULTS: After confirmatory biopsy, 34% demonstrated Gleason score upgrade, out of which 25% were Gleason score 3+4 and 8.5% primary Gleason pattern 4. Results remained consistent for the subgroup analysis and a weak positive association, but not statistically significant, between prostate specific antigen (PSA), age, and percentage of positive cores, and PCa upgrading at confirmatory biopsy was found. CONCLUSION: In our single centre study, we found that one-third of patients had higher Gleason score at confirmatory biopsy. Furthermore 8.5% of these upgraders had a primary Gleason pattern 4. Our results together with previously published evidence highlight the need for the revision of current guidelines in prostate cancer diagnosis for the selection of men for active surveillance.

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: To evaluate whether the rate of Gleason score (GS) upgrade on final pathology, the rate of positive surgical margins (PSM) and the rate of biochemical recurrence (BCR) after radical prostatectomy (RP) were different if prostate biopsy (PB) was graded by community pathologists (CP) as compared to specialized uro-pathologists (UP). METHODS: A consecutive series of patients undergoing RP in our institution between 2005 and 2013 were retrospectively reviewed. Any GS higher or lower in RP specimen as compared to PB GS was defined as GS upgrade or downgrade, respectively. Additionally, stratification for the new ISUP 2014 grading system was performed. Predictors of GS upgrade and PSMs and prognostic parameters for BCR were assessed by stepwise logistic regression models and by multivariable Cox regression analyses, respectively. RESULTS: A total of 786 patients were available for analysis, and median follow-up was 36 months (1-101 months). A GS upgrade was found in 345 patients (43.9 %) and a GS downgrade in 91 patients (11.6 %). Discordance between PB GS and RP GS was significantly more frequent when grading had been performed by a CP (50.5 % upgrade, 9.0 % downgrade) than by a UP (33.1 % upgrade, 15.7 % downgrade, p < 0.001). CP evaluation was an independent predictor for GS upgrade (odds ratio [OR] 1.91, p < 0.001) and for PSMs (OR 1.69, p = 0.003), as well as an independent predictor of BCR (hazard ratio [HR] 1.65, p = 0.028). CONCLUSIONS: Pathologic evaluation of PBs by a dedicated UP should be recommended to reduce the rate of biopsy undergrading, PSM and BCR after RP.

Asunto(s)