Transperineal Prostate Core Needle Biopsy: A Comparison of Coaxial Versus Noncoaxial Method in a Randomised Trial

A systematic review on the outcomes of local anaesthetic transperineal prostate biopsy

OBJECTIVE

To conduct a systematic review of the literature to assess the diagnostic ability, complication rate, patient tolerability, and cost of local anaesthetic (LA) transperineal prostate biopsy.

METHODS

Two reviewers searched Medline, the Cochrane Library, and Embase for publications on LA transperineal prostate biopsy up to March 2021. Outcomes of interest included cancer detection rates, complication rates, pain assessments and cost.

RESULTS

A total of 35 publications with 113 944 men were included in this review. The cancer detection rate for LA transperineal prostate biopsy in patients undergoing primary biopsy was 52% (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.45-0.60; I² = 97) and the clinically significant cancer detection rate (Gleason≥3 + 4) was 37% (95% CI 0.24-0.52; I² = 99%). The rate of infection-related complications in the included studies was 0.15% (95% CI 0.0000-0.0043; I² = 86). The LA transperineal procedures had a low rate of procedural abandonment (26/6954, 0.37%), with the greatest pain scores measured during LA administration. No formal cost analyses on LA transperineal prostate biopsies were identified in the literature. The overall risk of bias in the included studies was high, with considerable study heterogeneity and publication bias.

CONCLUSION

Transperineal prostate biopsy performed under LA is a viable option for centres interested in avoiding the risk of infection associated with transrectal biopsy, and the logistical burden of general anaesthesia. Further investigation into LA transperineal prostate biopsy with comparative studies is warranted for its consideration as the standard in prostate biopsy technique.

Role of Prophylactic Antibiotics in Transperineal Prostate Biopsy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Context

Objective

Evidence acquisition

Evidence synthesis

Conclusions

Patient summary

Risk of needle tract seeding after coaxial ultrasound-guided percutaneous biopsy for primary and metastatic tumors of the liver: report of a single institution

Purpose

The objective of this study was to determine the incidence of needle track seeding after ultrasound-guided percutaneous biopsy of indeterminate liver lesions with a coaxial biopsy system without any other additional intervention or ablation therapy.

Methods

We identified 172 patients in a retrospective cohort study who underwent ultrasound-guided biopsy due to a liver mass in our institution between 2007 and 2016. The same coaxial biopsy system was used in all patients, no consecutive ablation was performed.

Results

None of the finally included 131 patients developed neoplastic seeding. There was one major complication (0.76%), the rest of the complications were minor (3.8%) and did not require further intervention.

Conclusion

Needle track seeding is a rare delayed complication after percutaneous liver biopsy. Coaxial liver biopsy is a safe method to obtain multiple samples with a single punch in patients with primary or metastatic liver lesions.

Usefulness of real-time contrast-enhanced ultrasound guided coaxial needle biopsy for focal liver lesions

PURPOSE

To evaluate the utility of real-time contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS)-guided coaxial needle biopsies for focal liver lesions (FLL) that were inconspicuous or could not be accurately identified the active site on B-mode ultrasound (US).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This prospective study included 76 patients who had CEUS-guided coaxial needle biopsies for FLL between December 2015 and June 2017. We recorded characteristics of target lesions. We evaluated conspicuity of target lesions and accuracy of identifying the active site of target lesions on B-mode US and CEUS using a 5-point scale. Patients were divided into three groups, and analyzed according to body mass index (BMI). Based on the final diagnosis, the diagnostic performance was evaluated.

RESULTS

The mean size and depth of target lesions were 41.5 ± 28.5 and 47.9 ± 18.9 mm on CEUS, respectively. In arterial phase, the enhanced pattern of target lesions varied. The conspicuity of target lesions and accuracy of identifying the active site of target lesions was significantly improved on CEUS compared to B-mode US (p < 0.05). The three BMI groups had significant differences in conspicuity of target lesions after using CEUS (p < 0.05). The high BMI group had a greater change in conspicuity of lesions compared to the normal BMI group or the low BMI group (p < 0.05). The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of this technique for the diagnosis of FLL were 92.8%, 100%, and 93.4%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Real-time CEUS-guided coaxial needle biopsy can be very useful for FLL that are inconspicuous or cannot be accurately identified the active site on B-mode US.

Developing a five-step training model for transperineal prostate biopsies in a naïve residents' group: a prospective observational randomised study of two different techniques

PURPOSE

To evaluate a five-step training model for transperineal prostate biopsies (TPPB) and the differences in terms of the detection rate (DR) and the ease of execution when using either the "fan technique" (FT) or the use of a Free Hand technique (FH).

METHODS

A prospective observational randomised study was conducted from September 2015 to November 2017. Six naïve residents, who underwent the same five-steps training model, were randomly subdivided into two different groups of three residents based on the selected TPPB technique: A (FT) and B (FH). Patient characteristics (age, PSA, prostatic volume, DRE, MRI), intraoperative (operative time, number of samples) and postoperative parameters (histologic, pain) were evaluated in the 2 groups. The overall and stratified DR for PSA ranges and prostate volume (PV), operative time and complications were compared.

RESULTS

The overall detection rate was very high in both groups (FT 58.2% vs FH 59.6%) and not statistically different between the two techniques. There were no differences in terms of complication rates and pain. The FH showed a better detection rate in prostates smaller than 40 cc (p = 0.023) and a faster operative time (p = 0.025) compared to FT.

CONCLUSIONS

Within the TPPB, FH is associated with a higher detection rate in patients with prostate < 40 cc compared to an FT when performed by inexperienced trainees. Standardised training organised in consecutive steps seems to contribute to the achievement of overall high detection rates with both methods.