Loading…
The transition from transrectal to transperineal prostate biopsy without antibiotic prophylaxis: Cancer detection rates and complication rates
Background Currently, transperineal prostate biopsy (TPB) is preferred over transrectal biopsy (TRB) because of less infectious complications and improved clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) detection. However, literature on omitting antibiotic prophylaxis (AP) is limited. Furthermore, pr...
Saved in:
Published in: | Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases 2023-09, Vol.26 (3), p.581-587 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c375t-ee0ee69fa940d2cde4e053a0b4ad25956396027036d39c1e76bbc8ea12b60f403 |
---|---|
cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c375t-ee0ee69fa940d2cde4e053a0b4ad25956396027036d39c1e76bbc8ea12b60f403 |
container_end_page | 587 |
container_issue | 3 |
container_start_page | 581 |
container_title | Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases |
container_volume | 26 |
creator | Hogenhout, Renée Remmers, Sebastiaan van Leenders, Geert J. L. H. Roobol, Monique J. |
description | Background
Currently, transperineal prostate biopsy (TPB) is preferred over transrectal biopsy (TRB) because of less infectious complications and improved clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) detection. However, literature on omitting antibiotic prophylaxis (AP) is limited. Furthermore, previous studies did not include invasive cribriform growth/intraductal carcinoma (CR/IDC) in the definition of csPCa. Therefore, we compared the infectious complication rates between TPB without AP and TRB with AP, and we compared the csPCa detection rates between TPB and TRB including CR/IDC in the definition of csPCa.
Methods
We included 729 men who were referred to Erasmus MC Cancer Institute between 2013-2019 for MRI/TRUS fusion-guided prostate biopsy. Up to 2019, TRB was performed with AP, thereafter TPB was performed without AP. Data on complications were collected prospectively. We compared csPCa detection rates between the biopsy routes using multivariable logistic regressions for men without previous PCa diagnosis and mixed logistic regression for men on active surveillance. To compare the csPCa detection rates in anterior and apical lesions, and the complications rates between the biopsy routes, we used the chi-square test.
Results
Overall, we found no difference in csPCa detection between TPB and TRB (odds ratio 1.0, 95%-confidence interval (CI) 0.62–1.76,
p
= 0.9; for men on active surveillance: odds ratio 1.05, 95%-CI 0.58–1.88,
p
= 0.9). This was confirmed in anterior and apical lesions although absolute numbers were low. TPB reduced infectious complications with fever compared to TRB (1.1% vs 5.1%, difference = 4.0%, 95%-CI 1.0–7.9,
p
= 0.010).
Conclusions
TPB has no different csPCa detection rate from TRB taking CR/IDC into account. TPB is, however, preferable because of less infectious complications, even if AP is omitted. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1038/s41391-022-00641-3 |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2765070436</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2856659895</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c375t-ee0ee69fa940d2cde4e053a0b4ad25956396027036d39c1e76bbc8ea12b60f403</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kc1u1TAQhS0Eoj_wAiyQJTZsUsZ27MTs0BW0lSqxKWvLcSZcV0kcbEf0vkSfGV9SqMSClT0z35wZzSHkDYMLBqL9kGomNKuA8wpA1awSz8gpqxtVSQXt8_IXSlZNK_kJOUvpDgA00_CSnAilBJNCnZKH2z3SHO2cfPZhpkMM0xZHdNmONIctXDD6GUtiiSFlm5F2PizpQH_6vA9rpnbOvqSyd0dk2R9Ge-_TR7qzs8NIe8xF8DgiluZU8J66MC2jd_Yp_Yq8GOyY8PXje06-ffl8u7uqbr5eXu8-3VRONDJXiICo9GB1DT13PdYIUljoattzqaUSWgFvQKheaMewUV3nWrSMdwqGGsQ5eb_pllV_rJiymXxyOI52xrAmwxsloYFaqIK--we9C2ucy3aGt1IpqVstC8U3ypXzlNsNZol-svFgGJijW2ZzyxS3zG-3jChNbx-l127C_m_LH3sKIDYgldL8HePT7P_I_gJOqqN4</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2856659895</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>The transition from transrectal to transperineal prostate biopsy without antibiotic prophylaxis: Cancer detection rates and complication rates</title><source>Springer Nature</source><creator>Hogenhout, Renée ; Remmers, Sebastiaan ; van Leenders, Geert J. L. H. ; Roobol, Monique J.</creator><creatorcontrib>Hogenhout, Renée ; Remmers, Sebastiaan ; van Leenders, Geert J. L. H. ; Roobol, Monique J.</creatorcontrib><description>Background
Currently, transperineal prostate biopsy (TPB) is preferred over transrectal biopsy (TRB) because of less infectious complications and improved clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) detection. However, literature on omitting antibiotic prophylaxis (AP) is limited. Furthermore, previous studies did not include invasive cribriform growth/intraductal carcinoma (CR/IDC) in the definition of csPCa. Therefore, we compared the infectious complication rates between TPB without AP and TRB with AP, and we compared the csPCa detection rates between TPB and TRB including CR/IDC in the definition of csPCa.
Methods
We included 729 men who were referred to Erasmus MC Cancer Institute between 2013-2019 for MRI/TRUS fusion-guided prostate biopsy. Up to 2019, TRB was performed with AP, thereafter TPB was performed without AP. Data on complications were collected prospectively. We compared csPCa detection rates between the biopsy routes using multivariable logistic regressions for men without previous PCa diagnosis and mixed logistic regression for men on active surveillance. To compare the csPCa detection rates in anterior and apical lesions, and the complications rates between the biopsy routes, we used the chi-square test.
Results
Overall, we found no difference in csPCa detection between TPB and TRB (odds ratio 1.0, 95%-confidence interval (CI) 0.62–1.76,
p
= 0.9; for men on active surveillance: odds ratio 1.05, 95%-CI 0.58–1.88,
p
= 0.9). This was confirmed in anterior and apical lesions although absolute numbers were low. TPB reduced infectious complications with fever compared to TRB (1.1% vs 5.1%, difference = 4.0%, 95%-CI 1.0–7.9,
p
= 0.010).
Conclusions
TPB has no different csPCa detection rate from TRB taking CR/IDC into account. TPB is, however, preferable because of less infectious complications, even if AP is omitted.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1365-7852</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1476-5608</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1038/s41391-022-00641-3</identifier><identifier>PMID: 36631536</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>London: Nature Publishing Group UK</publisher><subject>692/699/2768/1753/466 ; 692/699/67/2322 ; Antibiotics ; Biomedical and Life Sciences ; Biomedicine ; Biopsy ; Cancer ; Cancer Research ; Chi-square test ; Complications ; Disease prevention ; Lesions ; Prophylaxis ; Prostate ; Prostate cancer ; Reproductive Medicine ; Statistical analysis ; Surveillance</subject><ispartof>Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases, 2023-09, Vol.26 (3), p.581-587</ispartof><rights>The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Limited 2023. Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.</rights><rights>2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Limited.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c375t-ee0ee69fa940d2cde4e053a0b4ad25956396027036d39c1e76bbc8ea12b60f403</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c375t-ee0ee69fa940d2cde4e053a0b4ad25956396027036d39c1e76bbc8ea12b60f403</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-9530-6448 ; 0000-0001-6967-1708 ; 0000-0003-2176-9102 ; 0000-0002-8263-9507</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27922,27923</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36631536$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Hogenhout, Renée</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Remmers, Sebastiaan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van Leenders, Geert J. L. H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Roobol, Monique J.</creatorcontrib><title>The transition from transrectal to transperineal prostate biopsy without antibiotic prophylaxis: Cancer detection rates and complication rates</title><title>Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases</title><addtitle>Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis</addtitle><addtitle>Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis</addtitle><description>Background
Currently, transperineal prostate biopsy (TPB) is preferred over transrectal biopsy (TRB) because of less infectious complications and improved clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) detection. However, literature on omitting antibiotic prophylaxis (AP) is limited. Furthermore, previous studies did not include invasive cribriform growth/intraductal carcinoma (CR/IDC) in the definition of csPCa. Therefore, we compared the infectious complication rates between TPB without AP and TRB with AP, and we compared the csPCa detection rates between TPB and TRB including CR/IDC in the definition of csPCa.
Methods
We included 729 men who were referred to Erasmus MC Cancer Institute between 2013-2019 for MRI/TRUS fusion-guided prostate biopsy. Up to 2019, TRB was performed with AP, thereafter TPB was performed without AP. Data on complications were collected prospectively. We compared csPCa detection rates between the biopsy routes using multivariable logistic regressions for men without previous PCa diagnosis and mixed logistic regression for men on active surveillance. To compare the csPCa detection rates in anterior and apical lesions, and the complications rates between the biopsy routes, we used the chi-square test.
Results
Overall, we found no difference in csPCa detection between TPB and TRB (odds ratio 1.0, 95%-confidence interval (CI) 0.62–1.76,
p
= 0.9; for men on active surveillance: odds ratio 1.05, 95%-CI 0.58–1.88,
p
= 0.9). This was confirmed in anterior and apical lesions although absolute numbers were low. TPB reduced infectious complications with fever compared to TRB (1.1% vs 5.1%, difference = 4.0%, 95%-CI 1.0–7.9,
p
= 0.010).
Conclusions
TPB has no different csPCa detection rate from TRB taking CR/IDC into account. TPB is, however, preferable because of less infectious complications, even if AP is omitted.</description><subject>692/699/2768/1753/466</subject><subject>692/699/67/2322</subject><subject>Antibiotics</subject><subject>Biomedical and Life Sciences</subject><subject>Biomedicine</subject><subject>Biopsy</subject><subject>Cancer</subject><subject>Cancer Research</subject><subject>Chi-square test</subject><subject>Complications</subject><subject>Disease prevention</subject><subject>Lesions</subject><subject>Prophylaxis</subject><subject>Prostate</subject><subject>Prostate cancer</subject><subject>Reproductive Medicine</subject><subject>Statistical analysis</subject><subject>Surveillance</subject><issn>1365-7852</issn><issn>1476-5608</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kc1u1TAQhS0Eoj_wAiyQJTZsUsZ27MTs0BW0lSqxKWvLcSZcV0kcbEf0vkSfGV9SqMSClT0z35wZzSHkDYMLBqL9kGomNKuA8wpA1awSz8gpqxtVSQXt8_IXSlZNK_kJOUvpDgA00_CSnAilBJNCnZKH2z3SHO2cfPZhpkMM0xZHdNmONIctXDD6GUtiiSFlm5F2PizpQH_6vA9rpnbOvqSyd0dk2R9Ge-_TR7qzs8NIe8xF8DgiluZU8J66MC2jd_Yp_Yq8GOyY8PXje06-ffl8u7uqbr5eXu8-3VRONDJXiICo9GB1DT13PdYIUljoattzqaUSWgFvQKheaMewUV3nWrSMdwqGGsQ5eb_pllV_rJiymXxyOI52xrAmwxsloYFaqIK--we9C2ucy3aGt1IpqVstC8U3ypXzlNsNZol-svFgGJijW2ZzyxS3zG-3jChNbx-l127C_m_LH3sKIDYgldL8HePT7P_I_gJOqqN4</recordid><startdate>20230901</startdate><enddate>20230901</enddate><creator>Hogenhout, Renée</creator><creator>Remmers, Sebastiaan</creator><creator>van Leenders, Geert J. L. H.</creator><creator>Roobol, Monique J.</creator><general>Nature Publishing Group UK</general><general>Nature Publishing Group</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7TO</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8C1</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>M7Z</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9530-6448</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6967-1708</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2176-9102</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8263-9507</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20230901</creationdate><title>The transition from transrectal to transperineal prostate biopsy without antibiotic prophylaxis: Cancer detection rates and complication rates</title><author>Hogenhout, Renée ; Remmers, Sebastiaan ; van Leenders, Geert J. L. H. ; Roobol, Monique J.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c375t-ee0ee69fa940d2cde4e053a0b4ad25956396027036d39c1e76bbc8ea12b60f403</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><topic>692/699/2768/1753/466</topic><topic>692/699/67/2322</topic><topic>Antibiotics</topic><topic>Biomedical and Life Sciences</topic><topic>Biomedicine</topic><topic>Biopsy</topic><topic>Cancer</topic><topic>Cancer Research</topic><topic>Chi-square test</topic><topic>Complications</topic><topic>Disease prevention</topic><topic>Lesions</topic><topic>Prophylaxis</topic><topic>Prostate</topic><topic>Prostate cancer</topic><topic>Reproductive Medicine</topic><topic>Statistical analysis</topic><topic>Surveillance</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Hogenhout, Renée</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Remmers, Sebastiaan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van Leenders, Geert J. L. H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Roobol, Monique J.</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Oncogenes and Growth Factors Abstracts</collection><collection>Health Medical collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Public Health Database</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>AUTh Library subscriptions: ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Biological Sciences</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>PML(ProQuest Medical Library)</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Biochemistry Abstracts 1</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Hogenhout, Renée</au><au>Remmers, Sebastiaan</au><au>van Leenders, Geert J. L. H.</au><au>Roobol, Monique J.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>The transition from transrectal to transperineal prostate biopsy without antibiotic prophylaxis: Cancer detection rates and complication rates</atitle><jtitle>Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases</jtitle><stitle>Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis</stitle><addtitle>Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis</addtitle><date>2023-09-01</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>26</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>581</spage><epage>587</epage><pages>581-587</pages><issn>1365-7852</issn><eissn>1476-5608</eissn><abstract>Background
Currently, transperineal prostate biopsy (TPB) is preferred over transrectal biopsy (TRB) because of less infectious complications and improved clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) detection. However, literature on omitting antibiotic prophylaxis (AP) is limited. Furthermore, previous studies did not include invasive cribriform growth/intraductal carcinoma (CR/IDC) in the definition of csPCa. Therefore, we compared the infectious complication rates between TPB without AP and TRB with AP, and we compared the csPCa detection rates between TPB and TRB including CR/IDC in the definition of csPCa.
Methods
We included 729 men who were referred to Erasmus MC Cancer Institute between 2013-2019 for MRI/TRUS fusion-guided prostate biopsy. Up to 2019, TRB was performed with AP, thereafter TPB was performed without AP. Data on complications were collected prospectively. We compared csPCa detection rates between the biopsy routes using multivariable logistic regressions for men without previous PCa diagnosis and mixed logistic regression for men on active surveillance. To compare the csPCa detection rates in anterior and apical lesions, and the complications rates between the biopsy routes, we used the chi-square test.
Results
Overall, we found no difference in csPCa detection between TPB and TRB (odds ratio 1.0, 95%-confidence interval (CI) 0.62–1.76,
p
= 0.9; for men on active surveillance: odds ratio 1.05, 95%-CI 0.58–1.88,
p
= 0.9). This was confirmed in anterior and apical lesions although absolute numbers were low. TPB reduced infectious complications with fever compared to TRB (1.1% vs 5.1%, difference = 4.0%, 95%-CI 1.0–7.9,
p
= 0.010).
Conclusions
TPB has no different csPCa detection rate from TRB taking CR/IDC into account. TPB is, however, preferable because of less infectious complications, even if AP is omitted.</abstract><cop>London</cop><pub>Nature Publishing Group UK</pub><pmid>36631536</pmid><doi>10.1038/s41391-022-00641-3</doi><tpages>7</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9530-6448</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6967-1708</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2176-9102</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8263-9507</orcidid></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1365-7852 |
ispartof | Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases, 2023-09, Vol.26 (3), p.581-587 |
issn | 1365-7852 1476-5608 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2765070436 |
source | Springer Nature |
subjects | 692/699/2768/1753/466 692/699/67/2322 Antibiotics Biomedical and Life Sciences Biomedicine Biopsy Cancer Cancer Research Chi-square test Complications Disease prevention Lesions Prophylaxis Prostate Prostate cancer Reproductive Medicine Statistical analysis Surveillance |
title | The transition from transrectal to transperineal prostate biopsy without antibiotic prophylaxis: Cancer detection rates and complication rates |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-13T17%3A42%3A38IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The%20transition%20from%20transrectal%20to%20transperineal%20prostate%20biopsy%20without%20antibiotic%20prophylaxis:%20Cancer%20detection%20rates%20and%20complication%20rates&rft.jtitle=Prostate%20cancer%20and%20prostatic%20diseases&rft.au=Hogenhout,%20Ren%C3%A9e&rft.date=2023-09-01&rft.volume=26&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=581&rft.epage=587&rft.pages=581-587&rft.issn=1365-7852&rft.eissn=1476-5608&rft_id=info:doi/10.1038/s41391-022-00641-3&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2856659895%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c375t-ee0ee69fa940d2cde4e053a0b4ad25956396027036d39c1e76bbc8ea12b60f403%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2856659895&rft_id=info:pmid/36631536&rfr_iscdi=true |