Trexit: A “Clean” Withdrawal from Transrectal Prostate Biopsies – Prospective Results of In-office Freehand Transperineal Biopsies Under Local Anaesthesia
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24915/aup.193Keywords:
Image-Guided Biopsy, Prostate/pathology, Prostatic NeoplasmsAbstract
Introduction: Prostate biopsy (PB) may be performed by either the transrectal (TR) or transperineal (TP) approach. Cancer detection rates seem to be comparable between the two approaches. However, evidence suggests a reduced infection risk and a higher detection of tumours localised in the anterior zone of the prostate with the TP route. TP-PB is currently recommended as a first-line procedure for the diagnosis of prostate cancer (PCa) whenever available.
We sought to report the initial results of in-office freehand TP-PB under local anaesthesia in the outpatient setting.
Methods: We conducted a prospective study with consecutive sampling with data from men submitted to TP-PB from Sep/2019 to Sep/2021, in a tertiary care centre. A questionnaire was carried out to appraise the pain related to the procedure on a pain numerical rating scale from 0 to 10.
Presenting PSA, biopsy result and characteristics and complications that motivated a visit to the emergency department–ED – until 1 month after the PB were analysed.
Antibiotic (AB) prophylaxis was not provided to any of the patients undergoing TP-PB.
TP-PB was performed under local anaesthesia by freehand method.
Results: A hundred and eight (108) patients underwent TP-PB. The mean age was 66±9 years old.
The median presenting PSA was comparable in patients with positive and negative PB results (7.7 ng/mL, p=0.11).
Overall, 67/108 (62%) patients had PCa diagnosed. Clinically significant (cs) PCa (ISUP=2) was diagnosed in 42/67 (63%) patients.
The TP approach allowed the diagnosis of anterior zone PCa in 61% (41/67) of the patients (anterior zone csPCa in 63% of these), 7% (5/67) had exclusively anterior zone pathological findings. Complications leading to an ED visit were recorded in only one patient.
Patients reported only mild levels of discomfort related to the anaesthesia infiltration (3±3) and to the introduction of the US transducer (3±3). Globally, the patients ascribed a pain of 3±3 to the entire procedure.
Conclusion: Freehand TP-PB under local anaesthesia, without AB prophylaxis, is a well-tolerated and safe procedure, feasible as an outpatient procedure.
TP-PB provides an easy access to the anterior zone of the prostate allowing for the diagnosis of previously missed PCa.
Downloads
References
World Health Organization. Portugal - Global Cancer Observatory. Globocan. 2020. 2020;501:1-2. [accessed Oct 20222] Available at: https://gco.iarc.fr/today/data/factsheets/populations/ 620-portugal-fact-sheets.pdf
Borghesi M, Ahmed H, Nam R, Schaeffer E, Schiavina R, Taneja S, et al. Complications After Systematic, Random, and Image-guided Prostate Biopsy. Eur Urol. 2017;71:353-65. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo. 2016.08.004.
Pradere B, Veeratterapillay R, Dimitropoulos K, Yuan Y, Omar MI, MacLennan S, et al. Nonantibiotic strategies for the prevention of infectious complications following prostate biopsy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Urol. 2021;205:653-63. doi:10.1097/JU. 0000000000001399
Guo LH, Wu R, Xu HX, Xu JM, Wu J, Wang S, et al. Comparison between ultrasound guided transperineal and transrectal prostate biopsy: a prospective, randomized, and controlled trial. Sci Rep. 2015;5:1-10. doi:10.1038/srep16089
Bhatt NR, Breen K, Haroon UM, Akram M, Flood HD, Giri SK. Patient experience after transperineal template prostate biopsy compared to prior transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy. Centr Eur J Urol. 2018;71:43-7. doi:10.5173/ceju.2017.1536
Ristau BT, Allaway M, Cendo D, Hart J, Riley J, Parousis V, et al. Freehand transperineal prostate biopsy provides acceptable cancer detection and minimizes risk of infection: evolving experience with a 10sector template. Urol Oncol. 2018;36:528.e15-528.e20. doi:10. 1016/j.urolonc.2018.09.013
Lv Z, Jiang H, Hu X, Yang C, Chand H, Tang C, et al. Efficacy and safety of periprostatic nerve block combined with perineal subcutaneous anaesthesia and intrarectal lidocaine gel in transrectal ultrasound guided transperineal prostate biopsy: A Prospective Randomised Controlled Trial. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2020;23:74-80. doi: 10.1038/s41391-019-0155-0.
Pilatz A, Veeratterapillay R, Dimitropoulos K, Omar MI, Pradere B, Yuan Y, et al. European Association of Urology Position Paper on the Prevention of Infectious Complications Following Prostate Biopsy. Eur Urol. 2021;79:11-5. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2020.10.019.
Stefanova V, Buckley R, Flax S, Spevack L, Hajek D, Tunis A, et al. Transperineal Prostate Biopsies Using Local Anesthesia: Experience with 1,287 Patients. Prostate Cancer Detection Rate, Complications and Patient Tolerability. J Urol. 2019;201:1121-6. doi: 10.1097/JU. 0000000000000156.
McGrath S, Christidis D, Clarebrough E, Ingle R, Perera M, Bolton D, et al. Transperineal prostate biopsytips for analgesia. BJU Int. 2017; 120:164-7. doi: 10.1111/bju.13859.
Mottet N, Bellmunt J, Bolla M, Briers E, Cumberbatch MG, De Santis M, et al. EAU-ESTRO-SIOG Guidelines on Prostate Cancer. Part 1: Screening, Diagnosis, and Local Treatment with Curative Intent. Eur Urol. 2017;71:618-29. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2016.08.003.
Huang GL, Kang CH, Lee WC, Chiang PH. Comparisons of cancer detection rate and complications between transrectal and transperineal prostate biopsy approaches - A single center preliminary study. BMC Urol. 2019;19:1-8. doi:10.1186/s12894-019-0539-4
Ristau BT, Allaway M, Cendo D, Hart J, Riley J, Parousis V, et al. Freehand transperineal prostate biopsy provides acceptable cancer detection and minimizes risk of infection: evolving experience with a 10-sector template. Urol Oncol. 2018;36:528.e15-528.e20. doi: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2018.09.013.
Lv Z, Jiang H, Hu X, Yang C, Chand H, Tang C, et al. Efficacy and safety of periprostatic nerve block combined with perineal subcutaneous anaesthesia and intrarectal lidocaine gel in transrectal ultrasound guided transperineal prostate biopsy: A Prospective Randomised Controlled Trial. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2020;23:74-80. doi: 10.1038/s41391-019-0155-0.
Bhatt NR, Breen K, Haroon UM, Akram M, Flood HD, Giri SK. Patient experience after transperineal template prostate biopsy compared to prior transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy. Cent European J Urol. 2018;71:43-7. doi:10.5173/ceju.2017.1536
Pilatz A, Veeratterapillay R, Köves B, Cai T, Bartoletti R, Wagenlehner F, et al. Update on Strategies to Reduce Infectious Complications After Prostate Biopsy. Eur Urol Focus. 2019;5:20-8. doi: 10.1016/j.euf.2018.11.009.
Pilatz A, Veeratterapillay R, Dimitropoulos K, Omar MI, Pradere B, Yuan Y, et al. European Association of Urology Position Paper on the Prevention of Infectious Complications Following Prostate Biopsy. Eur Urol. 2021;79:11-5. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2020.10.019.
Pradere B, Veeratterapillay R, Dimitropoulos K, Yuan Y, Omar MI, MacLennan S, et al. Nonantibiotic Strategies for the Prevention of Infectious Complications following Prostate Biopsy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. J Urol. 2021;205:653-63. doi: 10.1097/ JU.0000000000001399.
Xue J, Qin Z, Cai H, Zhang C, Li X, Xu W, et al. Comparison between transrectal and transperineal prostate biopsy for detection of prostate cancer: a meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis. Oncotarget. 2017;8:23322-36. doi:10.18632/ONCOTARGET.15056
Mantica G, Pacchetti A, Aimar R, Cerasuolo M, Dotta F, Olivero A, et al. Developing a five-step training model for transperineal prostate biopsies in a naïve residents’ group: a prospective observational randomised study of two different techniques. World J Urol. 2019;37: 1845-50. doi: 10.1007/s00345-018-2599-6.
Meyer AR, Joice GA, Schwen ZR, Partin AW, Allaf ME, Gorin MA. Initial Experience Performing In-office Ultrasound-guided Transperineal Prostate Biopsy Under Local Anesthesia Using the PrecisionPoint Transperineal Access System. Urology. 2018;115:8-13. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2018.01.021.
Published
Issue
Section
Copyright (c) 2023 Portuguese Association of Urology
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
