Morbidity Of Prostate Biopsy After Simplified Versus Complex Preparation Protocols: Assessment of Risk Factors

Zaytoun, Osama; Thomas, Anil A.; Moussa, Ayman S.; Li, Jianbo; Fareed, Khaled; Jones, J. Stephen

doi:10.1016/j.urology.2010.12.033

Cited by 93 publications

(74 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…MRI is even being studied prior to biopsy, which is perhaps the last frontier in prostate imaging (6). The attractiveness of MRI is the potential to reduce the need for prostate needle biopsy, which is invasive and is associated with significant complications (7)(8)(9)(10). However, the imperfect negative predictive value of MRI for significant prostate cancer prevents us from leaving out biopsy in men with a normal MRI (2,3).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Natural history of prostatic lesions on serial multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging

Ghavimi

Abdi

Waterhouse

et al. 2018

CUAJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: The natural history of prostatic lesions identified on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) is largely unknown. We aimed to describe changes observed over time on serial MRI. Methods: All patients with ≥2 MRI studies between 2008 and 2015 at our institution were identified. MRI progression was defined as an increase in Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS; version 2) or size of existing lesions, or the appearance of a new lesion PIRADS ≥4. Patients on active surveillance (AS) were analyzed for correlation of MRI progression to biopsy reclassification. Results: A total of 83 patients (54 on AS and 29 for diagnostic purposes) underwent serial MRI, with a mean interval of 1.9 years between scans. At baseline, 115 lesions (66 index, 49 non-index) were identified. Index lesions were more likely than non-index lesions to increase in size ≥2 mm (36.2 vs. 7.3 %; p=0.002). Overall progression was more likely to be seen among the index cohort (34.8 vs. 7.6%; p<0.001). New lesions with PIRADS ≥4 were seen on second imaging in 13 (16.5%) men, and became the index lesion in 29 cases (34.9%). Eighteen men on AS showed evidence of MRI progression (five with new lesions, 13 with progression of a previous lesion). Biopsy reclassification was present in three men (16.7%) with and seven men without MRI progression (19.4%). Conclusions: Overall changes in size and PIRADS scores of index lesions on MRI were small. New lesions were common, but usually did not alter management.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Natural history of prostatic lesions on serial multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging

Ghavimi

Abdi

Waterhouse

et al. 2018

CUAJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The increase in core biopsy templates from 6 to 12 has not been implicated as a risk factor for morbidity [15]. There is no consensus in current literature for protocols regarding the antibiotic based prophylaxis and enemas before TRUS guided prostate biopsy [2]. But in daily practice almost all patients (79% to 81%) receive bowel preparation before the biopsy [14].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although some authors indicate that pre-biopsy enemas increase the infectious complications; most investigators suggested that rectal preparation reduces the rate of bacteremia [9,17]. Although the pre-use of antibiotics is a standard procedure for TRUS guided prostate biopsy, there is no sufficient answer for the efficacy of enemas as a monotherapy [2]. Lindert et al reported a reduction in post-biopsy bacteremia with the use of pre-biopsy enema (from 28% to 4%) [18].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The comparison of the influence between two different bowel preparation methods on sepsis after prostate biopsies

Yıldırım¹,

Badem²,

Cavis³

et al. 2015

CEJU

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction Transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS) guided prostate needle biopsy has been performed to diagnose and stage prostate cancer for many years. There are many different bowel preparation protocols to diminish the infectious complications, but there is no standardized consensus among urologists. Therefore, we aimed to assess two different bowel preparation methods on the rate of infectious complications in patients who underwent TRUS-guided prostate biopsy. Material and methods A total of 387 cases of TRUS-guided prostate biopsy were included in this retrospective study. All patients received antibiotic prophylaxis with ciprofloxacin (500 mg) twice a day orally for 7 days starting on the day before the biopsy. The patients were divided into two groups according to the bowel preparation method used. Patients (Group 1, n = 164) only received self-administrated phosphate enema) on the morning of the prostate biopsy. Other patients (Group 2, n = 223) received sennasoid a-b laxatives the night before the prostate biopsy. Infectious complications were classified as sepsis, fever (greater than 38°C) without sepsis, and other clinical infections. Results Major complications developed in 14 cases (3.8%), including 3 cases (0.8%) of urinary retention, and 11 (3%) infectious complications, all of which were sepsis. There were 3 and 8 cases of urosepsis in Group 1 and Group 2, respectively. There were no statistically significant differences between both Groups regarding to the rates of urosepsis (p = 0.358). Conclusions Despite both methods of bowel preparation, sodium phosphate enema or sennasoid a-b calcium laxatives, before TRUS-guided prostate biopsy have similar effect on the rate of urosepsis, so both methods of bowel preparation can be safely used.

show abstract

“…Some authors believe that such preparation might even increase the level of bacteria in the rectum since it liquidizes the feces in the sigmoid colon and also impairs the quality of the sonographic images because of the air inserted during the preparation (18) . Evidences demonstrate that there are no significant difference in the rates of infectious complications among patients submitted or not to bowel preparation, since they have undergone antibiotic prophylaxis (18,19) . Thus, some authors support that bowel preparation increases the cost of the procedure and the discomfort of the patient with no additional benefit.…”

Section: Bowel Preparationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Preparation and management of complications in prostate biopsies

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Transrectal ultrasonography-guided biopsy plays a key role in prostate sampling for cancer detection. Among interventional procedures, it is one of the most frequent procedures performed by radiologists. Despite the safety and low morbidity of such procedure, possible complications should be promptly assessed and treated. The standardization of protocols and of preprocedural preparation is aimed at minimizing complications as well as expediting their management. The authors have made a literature review describing the possible complications related to transrectal ultrasonography-guided prostate biopsy, and discuss their management and guidance to reduce the incidence of such complications. Keywords: Prostate; Needle biopsy; Interventional ultrasonography; Complications.A biópsia transretal da próstata guiada por ultrassonografia tem papel fundamental na coleta de amostra para o diagnóstico do câncer prostático. Dentro do contexto intervencionista, constitui um dos principais procedimentos realizados pelo radiologista. Embora seja segura e com baixa morbimortalidade, complicações devem ser prontamente avaliadas e tratadas. O uso da padronização das condutas e do preparo antes do procedimento tem a finalidade de minimizar as complicações, assim como agilizar o seu tratamento. Dessa forma, o objetivo deste trabalho foi fazer uma revisão da literatura sobre as complicações relacionadas à biópsia transretal de próstata guiada por ultrassonografia, discutir seu manejo e orientações para reduzir sua incidência. Unitermos: Próstata; Biópsia por agulha; Ultrassonografia de intervenção; Complicações. AbstractResumo

show abstract

Morbidity Of Prostate Biopsy After Simplified Versus Complex Preparation Protocols: Assessment of Risk Factors

Cited by 93 publications

References 26 publications

Natural history of prostatic lesions on serial multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging

Natural history of prostatic lesions on serial multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging

The comparison of the influence between two different bowel preparation methods on sepsis after prostate biopsies

Preparation and management of complications in prostate biopsies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About