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...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases 2023-09, Vol.26 (3), p.581-587
Main Authors: Hogenhout, Renée, Remmers, Sebastiaan, van Leenders, Geert J. L. H., Roobol, Monique J.
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 &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Biological Sciences</collection><collection>Health &amp; 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