Periprostatic Local Anesthesia With Pudendal Block for Transperineal Ultrasound-guided Prostate Biopsy: A Randomized Trial

Risk Factors and Contemporary Management Options for Pain and Discomfort Experienced During a Prostate Biopsy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Prostate fusion biopsy, an innovative imaging modality for diagnosing prostate cancer, presents certain challenges for patients including discomfort and emotional distress, leading to nonadherence to treatment and follow-ups. To inform clinicians and offer pain relief alternatives to patients, this review delves into the risk factors for increased pain and modern management options to alleviate pain during prostate biopsy.

RECENT FINDINGS

Individual responses to pain vary, and the overall experience of pain during a prostate biopsy has been contributed to numerous factors such as patient age, prostate volume, previous biopsy experience, and more. As a result, several strategies aim to mitigate pain during in-office procedures. Notably, techniques including pharmacological analgesics, hand holding, heating pads, entertainment/virtual reality, and distraction have shown significant efficacy. Existing studies explore risk factors influencing pain intensity during prostate biopsy and effective pain management strategies. This review consolidates available information to guide clinicians in enhancing patient comfort and thus, encourage surveillance adherence.

Shifting to transperineal prostate biopsy: A narrative review

To address the limitations and challenges associated with transrectal (TR) biopsy and to present transperineal (TP) biopsy as a viable and potentially safer alternative to TR biopsy. Prostate cancer (PCa) is a significant global health concern. The prevalence of advanced-stage prostate cancer in Asia is higher than that in the United States, emphasizing the need for effective screening and diagnosis methods. The gold standard of diagnosis is a TR biopsy. However, it has limitations due to the risk of infection and potential complications, such as injury to the rectal artery. Efforts have been made to address issues such as false-negative biopsies, under-sampling, and over-sampling through MRI-guided biopsies. However, the TR approach makes it difficult to access the apical and anterior regions of the prostate. TP biopsy has emerged as an alternative to address the limitations of TR biopsy. Nevertheless, a TP biopsy is a painful procedure, requiring the use of general anesthesia and expensive equipment. As a result, it has been perceived as costly and time-consuming. In addition, it requires a steep learning curve. The introduction of local anesthesia such as pudendal nerve block and the adoption of freehand techniques have contributed to the feasibility of performing TP biopsy. Recent research indicates that freehand TP biopsy can yield comparable diagnostic results to template-guided approaches. The diagnostic performance, cancer detection rates, and complication rates of TP biopsy have demonstrated its potential as a safe and effective diagnostic method.

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.

Perineal nerve block versus periprostatic block for patients undergoing transperineal prostate biopsy (APROPOS): a prospective, multicentre, randomised controlled study

Background

We aimed to investigate perineal nerve block versus periprostatic block in pain control for men undergoing a transperineal prostate biopsy.

Methods

In this prospective, randomised, blinded and parallel-group trial, men in six Chinese hospitals with suspected prostate cancer were randomly assigned (1:1) at the point of local anaesthesia to receive a perineal nerve block or periprostatic block and followed by a transperineal prostate biopsy. Centres used their usual biopsy procedure. Operators who performed anaesthesia were trained in both techniques before the trial and were masked to the randomised allocation until the time of anaesthesia and were not involved in the subsequent biopsy procedure and any assessment or analysis. Other investigators and the patients were masked until trial completion. The primary outcome was the level of the worst pain experienced during the prostate biopsy procedure. Secondary outcomes included pain (post-biopsy at 1, 6 and 24 h), changes in blood pressure, heart rate and breathing rate during the biopsy procedure, external manifestations of pain during biopsy, anaesthesia satisfaction, the detection rate of PCa and clinically significant PCa. This trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04501055.

Findings

Between August 13, 2020, and July 20, 2022, 192 men were randomly assigned to perineal nerve block or periprostatic block, 96 per study group. Perineal nerve block was superior for the relief of pain during the biopsy procedure (mean 2.80 for perineal nerve block and 3.98 for periprostatic block; adjusted difference in means -1.17, P < 0.001). Although the perineal nerve block had a lower mean pain score at 1 h post-biopsy compared with the periprostatic block (0.23 vs 0.43, P = 0.042), they were equivalent at 6 h (0.16 vs 0.25, P = 0.389) and 24 h (0.10 vs 0.26, P = 0.184) respectively. For the change in vital signs during biopsy procedure, perineal nerve block was significantly superior to periprostatic block in terms of maximum value of systolic blood pressure, maximum value of mean arterial pressure and maximum value of heart rate. There are no statistical differences in average value of systolic blood pressure, average value of mean, average value of heart rate, diastolic blood pressure and breathing rate. Perineal nerve block was also superior to periprostatic block in external manifestations of pain (1.88 vs 3.00, P < 0.001) and anaesthesia satisfaction (8.93 vs 11.90, P < 0.001). Equivalence was shown for the detection rate of PCa (31.25% for perineal nerve block and 29.17% for periprostatic block, P = 0.753) or csPCa (23.96% for perineal nerve block and 20.83% for periprostatic block, P = 0.604). 33 (34.8%) of 96 patients in the perineal nerve block group and 40 (41.67%) of 96 patients in the periprostatic block group had at least one complication.

Interpretation

Perineal nerve block was superior to periprostatic block in pain control for men undergoing a transperineal prostate biopsy.

Funding

Grant 2019YFC0119100 from the National Key Research and Development Program of China.

Impact of prostate biopsy technique on outcomes of the precision prostatectomy procedure

Objective

To assess the impact of iterative changes in preoperative and postoperative biopsy techniques on the outcomes of men undergoing the precision prostatectomy procedure. Precision prostatectomy is a novel surgical treatment for prostate cancer that aims to maximally preserve erectogenic nerves via partial preservation of the prostate capsule.

Design

Retrospective.

Setting

Single tertiary care center.

Participants

This study included 120 patients who consented to undergo prostate cancer treatment with the precision prostatectomy procedure. Patients were originally enrolled in one of two separate prospective protocols studying precision prostatectomy.

Interventions

Preoperatively, 60 patients were screened with transrectal (TR) biopsy and 60 were screened by transperineal (TP) biopsy. Ultimately, 117 patients underwent precision prostatectomy. Of the 43 postoperative biopsies, 19 were TR; 17 were TP with ultrasound; and 7 were TP with microultrasound (mUS).

Main outcome measures

Preoperatively, we evaluated whether the transition to TP biopsy was associated with differences in postoperative treatment failure defined as a neoplasm-positive postoperative biopsy. Postoperative biopsies were compared with respect to their ability to sample the remnant tissue, specifically percentage of cores positive for prostate tissue.

Results

Preoperatively, 9/60 (15%) positive postoperative biopsies occurred in the TR group and 6/60 (10%) in the TP group; Kaplan-Meier survival estimates did not differ between groups (p=0.69 by log rank). Postoperatively, the numbers of cores positive for prostate tissue were 99/160 (62%), 63/107 (59%), and 36/39 (92%) in the TR biopsy, TP with ultrasound, and TP with mUS groups, respectively; this difference was statistically significant versus the rate in the TR and standard TP groups (p=0.0003 and 0.0002).

Conclusion

We found no significant improvement in patient screening, preoperatively—though limited by small sample size and relatively short follow-up. The incorporation of high-frequency mUS for postoperative biopsies improved the ability to sample the remnant tissue with a higher efficiency.

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

Context

Objective

Evidence acquisition

Evidence synthesis

Conclusions

Patient summary

Hundred years of transperineal prostate biopsy

The earliest recorded efforts to biopsy prostate, in the early 20th century, were made through transperineal (TP) approach, with open perineal prostate biopsy (PBx) being considered the gold standard for prostate cancer (PCa) diagnosis in that era. Later, to minimize morbidity and increase diagnostic accuracy, several technical modifications and transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) assistance were incorporated. However, in the 1980s, the transrectal (TR) approach became the predominant PBx method following the introduction of TRUS-TR PBx with sextant sampling, providing a convenient and efficacious method for prostate sampling. With modernization of PCa diagnosis, a recent resurgence of the TP PBx has been observed, driven primarily by TR drawbacks of infectious complications and sampling limitations. TP PBx is rapidly emerging as the new PBx standard, being officially recommended as the initial approach for biopsy in Europe and is increasingly being conducted and studied in the United States. The modern era of TP PBx is based on the improvements in local anesthesia techniques, TP access systems, and robotic assistance. These modifications and advancements have improved the ease of use, patient comfort, and diagnostic outcomes with TP PBx. Herein, we present a history of the evolution of TP PBx spanning over 100 years and explore the basis of the technique that merits future utilization.

Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging for the Detection of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer: What Urologists Need to Know. Part 4: Transperineal Magnetic Resonance-Ultrasound Fusion Guided Biopsy Using Local Anesthesia

BACKGROUND

Transperineal magnetic resonance imaging-transrectal ultrasound fusion guided biopsy (MFGB) is an increasingly popular technique due to increasing rates of biopsy-related infections. However, its widespread implementation has been hampered by the supposed necessity of epidural or general anesthesia.

OBJECTIVE

To demonstrate the technique, feasibility, and results of transperineal MFGB under local anesthesia, in an ambulatory setting without the administration of prophylactic antibiotics.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This single-center study enrolled consecutive biopsy-naïve men with a clinical suspicion of prostate cancer into a prospective database between November 2015 and November 2020. Men with Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) version 2 scores 3-5 underwent transperineal MFGB.

SURGICAL PROCEDURE

Transperineal MFGB was performed in an ambulatory setting under local anesthesia by a single operator.

MEASUREMENTS

Procedure-associated adverse events were recorded. Patient discomfort during both the local anesthesia and the biopsy procedure was determined using a visual analogic scale (0-10). Detection rates of grade group (GG) ≥2 prostate cancer and the proportion of men with GG 1 cancer were assessed.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

A total of 1097 eligible men underwent transperineal MFGB. The complication rate was 0.73% (8/1097); complications comprised five (0.46%) urinary tract infections including one hospitalization and three (0.27%) urinary retentions. In 735 men, the median pain scores were 2 (interquartile range [IQR] 2-3) for the local anesthesia procedure and 1 (IQR 0-2) for the biopsy. Prostate cancer was detected in 84% (926/1097) of men; 66% (723/1097) had GG ≥2 and 19% (203/1097) GG 1.

CONCLUSIONS

Transperineal MFGB can safely be performed as an outpatient procedure under local anesthesia in an ambulatory setting. The detection rate of clinically significant prostate cancer is high, and biopsy is well tolerated. Although no antibiotic prophylaxis was used, the rate of infectious complications is practicably negligible.

PATIENT SUMMARY

This article shows how tissue samples (biopsies) can accurately be obtained from suspicious regions seen on prostate magnetic resonance imaging via needles inserted in the perineum (skin between the scrotum and the anus) in men with suspected prostate cancer. This technique appears to be very well tolerated under local anesthesia and has a lower risk of infection without antibiotic prophylaxis than the more common biopsy route through the rectum, with antibiotics.

Anaesthesia in PROstate Biopsy Pain Obstruction Study: A Study Protocol for a Multicentre Randomised Controlled Study Evaluating the Efficacy of Perineal Nerve Block in Controlling Pain in Patients Undergoing Transperineal Prostate Biopsy

Introduction: Transperineal prostate biopsy is as effective as the transrectal biopsy in detecting prostate cancer and has a lower risk of infection. However, concerning the procedural pain of the transperineal route, a higher level of anaesthesia is needed, which prevents this approach from being widely used. Although several methods of local anaesthesia to relieve pain during transperineal biopsy have been described, few well-designed trials have been conducted to assess the efficacy of local anaesthesia.

Methods: This is a prospective, multicentre, randomised controlled study in men suspected of having prostate cancer and planning to undergo transperineal prostate biopsy. The aim of this trial is to determine whether the perineal nerve block and periprostatic block relieve pain to different extents in men undergoing transperineal biopsy. The main inclusion criteria are men aged between 18 and 80 years old, a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level of 4–20 ng/ml, or/and suspicious rectal examination findings. A sample size of 190 participants, accounting for a 10% loss, is required. All participants will be randomly allocated at a ratio of 1:1 to the perineal nerve block (n = 95) and periprostatic block groups (n = 95). The primary outcome will be the level of the worst pain experienced during the transperineal prostate biopsy procedure, which will be measured by a numerical rating scale (NRS). The key secondary outcomes will include the pain severity score at 1, 6, and 24 h after prostate biopsy.

Results: The primary outcome is the level of the worst pain experienced during the prostate biopsy procedure. The main secondary outcomes are as follows: (1) Post-biopsy pain severity score at 1, 6, and 24 h after the prostate biopsy; (2) Changes in blood pressure, heart rate and breathing rate during the biopsy procedure; (3) External manifestations of pain during biopsy; (4) Anaesthesia satisfaction; (5) The detection rate for clinically significant prostate cancer and any prostate cancer.

Conclusion: Anaesthesia in PROstate biopsy Pain Obstruction Study (APROPOS) is randomised controlled trial aiming to determine the efficacy of the perineal nerve block in controlling pain in patients undergoing prostate biopsy via the transperineal approach.

Clinical Trial Registration:www.ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier: NCT04501055.

Feasibility of transrectal and transperineal fiducial marker placement for prostate cancer before proton therapy

BACKGROUND

To compare the feasibility of transrectal and transperineal fiducial marker placement for prostate cancer before proton therapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From 2013 to 2015, the first 40 prostate cancer patients that were scheduled for proton therapy underwent transrectal fiducial marker placement, and the next 40 patients underwent transperineal fiducial marker placement (the first series). Technical and clinical success and pain scores were evaluated. In the second series (n = 280), the transrectal or transperineal approach was selected depending on the presence/absence of comorbidities, such as blood coagulation abnormalities. Seven patients refused to undergo the procedure. Thus, the total number of patients across both series was 353 (262 and 91 underwent the transrectal and transperineal approach, respectively). Technical and clinical success, complications, marker migration and the distance between the two markers were evaluated.

RESULTS

In the first series, the technical and clinical success rates were 100% in both groups. The transrectal group exhibited lower pain scores than the transperineal group. The overall technical success rates of the transrectal and transperineal groups were 100% (262/262) and 99% (90/91), respectively (P > 0.05). The overall clinical success rate was 100% in both groups, and there were no major complications in either group. The migration rates of the two groups did not differ significantly. The mean distance between the two markers was 25.6 ± 7.1 mm (mean ± standard deviation) in the transrectal group and 31.9 ± 5.2 mm in the transperineal group (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Both the transrectal and transperineal fiducial marker placement methods are feasible and safe.

The Effect on Pain and Anxiety of Hot Pad Applied to Patients During Transrectal Prostate Biopsy

AIM

The aim of the study was to evaluate the effect of the application of a heating pad on the sacral region on pain and anxiety during a transrectal prostate biopsy.

DESIGN

This was a quasi-experimental study.

METHODS

The quasi-experimental study was conducted in the Urology Outpatient Clinic of a Training and Research Hospital in Istanbul. A total of 40 males were nonrandomly divided into two groups: experimental group (n = 20) and control group (n = 20). A heating pad (40-45°C) was applied to the sacral region of the patients in the experimental group during transrectal prostate biopsy. Data were collected using the Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI) and visual analogue scale (VAS).

RESULTS

It was detected that the mean scores of the BAI were significantly lower in the experimental group compared with the control group (p < .001). The scores of the VAS were significantly lower in the experimental group compared with the control (p = .016).

CONCLUSION

Applying a heating pad to the sacral region during a transrectal prostate biopsy is an effective non-pharmacologic method to increase patient comfort and reduce pain and anxiety.

Transperineal prostate biopsy: The modern gold standard to prostate cancer diagnosis

In patients suspicious for prostate cancer, a prostate biopsy should be performed. Biopsies are possible either by the transrectal or transperineal routes. Compared with the transrectal prostate biopsy (TRPBx), transperineal prostate biopsy (TPPBx) offers a non-inferior cancer detection rate (CDR), especially in patients undergoing re-biopsy for persistently elevated PSA and in cases of active surveillance (AS), in which TPPBx seems to be superior. Moreover, the transperineal route achieves superior sampling of the anterior and apical regions, especially after previous multiple negative TRPBx. Infectious complications are nullified due to avoidance of needle passage through the rectal mucosa, and there is a highly significant evidence of reduced fever and sepsis rates when compared with TRPBx, with maintaining acceptable urinary retention rates. This is an important upcoming topic due to the increasing antibiotic resistance rates, thus reducing periinterventional hospitalization and health care costs. To date, TPPBx is perfectly feasible in the inpatient and out-patient settings and under local anesthesia, characterized by a moderate learning curve and a good reproducibility. By applying mpMRI as a diagnostic tool, clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) detection seems to be comparable to transrectal MRI-fusion biopsy (TR-MRIFBx). Finally, focal treatment of localized disease is currently performed exclusively through a TP approach.

Stereotactic robot-assisted transperineal prostate biopsy under local anaesthesia and sedation: moving robotic biopsy from operating theatre to clinic

This IRB-approved prospective pilot study evaluates the safety and feasibility of performing stereotactic robot-assisted transperineal MRI-US fusion targeted prostate biopsy under local anaesthesia (LA) with sedation. 30 patients who underwent robotic transperineal prostate biopsy between September 2017 and June 2018 were recruited. All biopsies were performed with the iSR'obot Mona Lisa^® and BK3000 ultrasound system. Intravenous paracetamol 1 g, with midazolam and fentanyl were given at positioning. After administration of 5 mL of 1%-lidocaine into the perineal skin 2 cm above and lateral to the anus, periapical prostatic block with 10 mL mixture of 1%-Lidocaine and 0.5%-Marcaine was given. The median age of patients was 66 years (range 53-80 years). Median PSA and mean prostate volume were 8.1 ng/ml (range 4.2-20.6 ng/ml) and 40.1 cc (range 18.6-70 cc). 24 (80.0%) patients had targeted prostate biopsy, with median number of targeted cores of 8 (range 5-16). All patients had saturation biopsy and median number of saturation cores was 21 (range 9-48). Mean dose of intravenous midazolam given was 1.5 mg (range 0-5 mg) and intravenous fentanyl was 75 mcg (10-150 mcg). No patient required conversion to GA. Two patients required motion compensation of 3 mm and 7.5 mm, respectively, due minor movement. Immediate post-operative pain score was 0 for all patients. 29 of 30 patients (96.7%) were discharged within 24 h of procedure. There were no immediate severe complications. Adenocarcinoma was detected in 19/30 (63.3%) cases. This pilot feasibility study showed that stereotactic robotic transperineal MRI-US fusion targeted prostate biopsy can be safely and accurately performed under LA with sedation.

Controversies in MR targeted biopsy: alone or combined, cognitive versus software-based fusion, transrectal versus transperineal approach?

PURPOSE

To review the evidence addressing current controversies around prostate biopsy. Specific questions explored were (1) mpMRI targeted (TgBx) alone versus combined with systematic (SBx) biopsy; (2) cognitive versus software-based targeted biopsy; (3) transrectal or transperineal route (TP).

METHODS

We performed a literature search of peer-reviewed English language articles using PubMed and the words "prostate" AND "biopsy". Web search was implemented by manual search.

RESULTS

Prostate mpMRI is revolutionizing prostate cancer (PCa) diagnosis, and TgBx improves the detection of clinically significant (cs) PCa compared to SBx alone. The utility of combining SBx-TgBx is variable, but in non-expert centres the two should be combined to overcome learning curve-limitations. Whether SBx should be maintained in expert centres depends on what rate of missed cancer the urological community and patients are prone to accept; this has implications for insignificant cancer diagnosis as well. TgBx may be more precise using a software-based-approach despite cognitive TgBx proved non-inferior in some studies, and may be used for large accessible lesions. TP-biopsies are feasible in an in-office setting. Avoidance of the rectum and accessibility of virtually all prostate areas are attractive features. However, this has to be balanced with local setting and resources implications. Ongoing trials will shed light on unsolved issues.

CONCLUSION

The prostate biopsy strategy should be tailored to local expertise, needs and resources availability. Targeted biopsy enhance the ratio between cs and insignificant cancer diagnosis, although some csPCa might be missed. Software-based TgBx are likely to be more precise, especially for new users, although the additional cost might be not justified in all cases. TPBx have ideal attributes for performing TgBx and avoiding infection, although this has resources implications.

How to Biopsy: Transperineal Versus Transrectal, Saturation Versus Targeted, What's the Evidence?

Until recently, prostate biopsy for the detection of prostate cancer has been performed transrectally and in an untargeted sampling fashion. Consequently, the procedure has suffered a small but significant risk of severe morbidity through infection, and low diagnostic accuracy, with undergrading and missed diagnosis being common. MRI is revolutionizing prostate cancer diagnosis by improving detection accuracy via targeted biopsy. Transperineal biopsy is eradicating sepsis as a risk of prostate biopsy, while avoiding the need for broad-spectrum or combination prophylactic antibiotics. This article analyzes the data on the various current methods of performing prostate biopsy and recommends an optimal technique.

Magnetic resonance imaging targeted transperineal prostate biopsy: a local anaesthetic approach

BACKGROUND

Despite high rates of disease misclassification and sepsis, the use of transrectal biopsy remains commonplace. Transperineal mapping biopsies mitigate these problems but carry increased cost and patient burden. Local anaesthetic, multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-targeted transperineal biopsy may offer an alternative. Here, we aim to determine the feasibility, tolerability and detection rates of clinically significant prostate cancer using a local anaesthetic, transperineal, MRI-targeted biopsy technique.

METHODS

Tertiary referral centre in which 181 consecutive men underwent local anaesthetic, transperineal MRI-targeted prostate biopsy (September 2014 to January 2016). A standardized local anaesthetic technique was used to obtain targeted biopsies using visual estimation with the number of targeted cores determined by each of a number of users. We assessed adverse events, patient visual analogue pain scores and detection rates of clinically significant cancer (defined by University College London (UCL) definitions one and two and separately by the presence of dominant and non-dominant Gleason pattern 4). We secondarily assessed detection of any cancer, rates of detection by MRI (Likert) score and by presenting PSA. Differences were assessed using Chi-squared tests (P<0.05).

RESULTS

One hundred eighty-one men with 243 lesions were included. There were no episodes of sepsis or re-admissions and one procedure was abandoned owing to patient discomfort. Twenty-three out of 25 (92%) men would recommend the procedure to another. Median visual analogue pain score was 1.0 (interquartile range: 0.0-2.4). A total 104/181 (57%) had UCL definition 1 disease (Gleason ⩾4+3 and/or maximum cancer length ⩾6 mm) and 129/181 (71%) had UCL definition 2 cancer (Gleason ⩾3+4 and/or maximum cancer length ⩾4 mm). Fifty-four out of 181 (30%) and 124/181 (69%) had dominant and non-dominant pattern 4 disease or greater (irrespective of cancer length). Any cancer was detected in 142/181 (78%). Significant disease was more likely in higher MRI-scoring lesions and in men with PSAs ⩾10 ng ml-1.

CONCLUSIONS

This approach to prostate biopsy is feasible, tolerable and can be performed in ambulatory settings.

Evaluation of MR imaging-targeted biopsies of the prostate in biopsy-naïve patients. A single centre study

PURPOSE

To evaluate the differences in prostate cancer detection rate and biopsy effectiveness between magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) target biopsy (TB) and transperineal standard biopsy (SB) in biopsy-naïve patients.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Between October 2014 and April 2016, 60 men with a mean age of 64.1±6.7 (SD) years (range: 53-82 years) were prospectively enrolled. All patients underwent a prostate MRI study, evaluated by two radiologists, before undergoing the biopsy. A transperineal 12-core SB was carried out before TB, without the information from the MRI. The detection rate for all tumors and for clinically significant tumors (CS) was recorded. Sampling variables such as the proportion of cores positive for CS cancer (PCP-CS) and the maximum cancer core length (MCCL) were also calculated. The ability of MRI to predict the presence of a CS tumor at biopsy was studied using a sector analysis. Patients with negative biopsies were followed during a minimum of 12 months.

RESULTS

The detection rate for SB and TB was 53.3% (32/60) and 46.7% (28/60) respectively for all tumors (P=0.289) and 45% (27/60) in both techniques for CS tumors. TB obtained a larger PCP-CS (P<0.001) and MCCL (P=0.018). The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and cancer prevalence was 83.3%, 92.9%, 83.3%, 92.9% and 30% for peripheral zone sectors and 43.8%, 97.1%, 70.0%, 91.8% and 13,3% for transitional zone sectors. The proportion of patients that showed an increase of PSA faster than 0.75ng/mL/year after a negative biopsy was 26.1%.

CONCLUSION

Detection rate of prostate cancer did not show significant differences between a TB and a SB technique in biopsy-naïve patients. However, targeted prostate biopsies demonstrated a better sampling effectiveness thus reducing the cores needed to diagnose clinically significant tumors.

[Value of MRI/ultrasound fusion in primary biopsy for the diagnosis of prostate cancer]

BACKGROUND

Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) plays an emerging role in prostate cancer diagnosis. We compared the cancer detection rates of targeted biopsy (tB) of suspicious lesions in mpMRI versus systematic transperineal saturation biopsy (sB) in men with primary suspicion of prostate cancer (PCa).

METHODS

A total of 437 consecutive primary biopsy patients, who underwent transperineal systematic and fusion-guided biopsy between 2012 and 2014, were enrolled. mpMRI was evaluated based on PI-RADS. Analysis of biopsy specimen was performed following START criteria.

RESULTS

Of the 437 men, 334 harbored 426 MR lesions. Overall, 274 PCa and 203 significant PCa (Gleason score (GS) ≥ 3 + 4, GS = 3 + 3 and PSA values ≥ 10 ng/ml) were detected. There were 52 (26 %) significant PCa exclusively found by sB, whereas only 18 (9 %) were identified by tB (p < 0.001). Of 80 high-grade PCa with GS ≥ 4 + 3, 70 were diagnosed by sB, and 60 by tB (p = 0.007). In addition, 54 % of all insignificant PCa (GS < 7, PSA < 10 ng/ml) were detected by sB alone (p < 0.001). AUC of mpMRI was 0.76-0.78.

CONCLUSION

The combination of tB + sB detects PCa most accurately. Ongoing prospective (multicenter) studies are evaluating the status of the 12 core TRUS-guided random biopsy.

Prevention of catheter-related bladder discomfort - pudendal nerve block with ropivacaine versus intravenous tramadol: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Background

Catheter-related bladder discomfort (CRBD) is a common distressing symptom complex during the postoperative period, especially after urologic procedures with a relatively greater size urinary catheter. In this study, we will enroll male patients undergoing elective prostate surgery with urinary catheterization under general anesthesia, and we will compare the efficacy of pudendal nerve block (PNB) and intravenous tramadol in CRBD prevention.

Methods/design

This trial is a prospective, randomized controlled trial that will test the superiority of bilateral PNB with 0.33 % ropivacaine compared with intravenous tramadol 1.5 mg/kg for CRBD prevention. A total of 94 male patients undergoing elective prostate surgery with urinary catheterization after anesthesia induction will be randomized to receive either bilateral PNB with 0.33 % ropivacaine (the PNB group) or intravenous tramadol 1.5 mg/kg (the tramadol group) after the completion of surgery. The primary outcome is the incidence of CRBD. The most important secondary outcome is the severity of postoperative CRBD, and other secondary outcomes include Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) score for postoperative pain; incidence of postoperative side effects such as postoperative nausea/vomiting, sedation, dizziness, and dry mouth; postoperative requirement for tramadol as a rescue treatment for CRBD and sufentanil as a rescue analgesic for postoperative pain; and NRS score for acceptance of an indwelling urinary catheter.

Discussion

This trial is planned to test the superiority of PNB with 0.33 % ropivacaine compared with intravenous tramadol 1.5 mg/kg. It may provide a basis for a new clinical practice for the prevention of CRBD.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02683070. Registered on 11 February 2016.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13063-016-1575-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Complications After Systematic, Random, and Image-guided Prostate Biopsy

CONTEXT

Prostate biopsy (PB) represents the gold standard method to confirm the presence of cancer. In addition to traditional random or systematic approaches, a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-guided technique has been introduced recently.

OBJECTIVE

To perform a systematic review of complications after transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided, transperineal, and MRI-guided PB.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

We performed a systematic literature search of Web of Science, Embase, and Scopus databases up to October 2015, according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. Complications and mortality following random, systematic, and image-guided PBs were reviewed. Eighty-five references were included.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

The most frequent complication after PB was minor and self-limiting bleeding (hematuria and hematospermia), regardless of the biopsy approach. Occurrence of rectal bleeding was comparable for traditional TRUS-guided and image-guided PBs. Almost 25% of patients experienced lower urinary tract symptoms, but only a few had urinary retention, with higher rates after a transperineal approach. Temporary erectile dysfunction was not negligible, with a return to baseline after 1-6 mo. The incidence of infective complications is increasing, with higher rates among men with medical comorbidities and older age. Transperineal and in-bore MRI-targeted biopsy may reduce the risk of severe infectious complications. Mortality after PB is uncommon, regardless of biopsy technique.

CONCLUSIONS

Complications after PB are frequent but often self-limiting. The incidence of hospitalization due to severe infections is continuously increasing. The patient's general health status, risk factors, and likelihood of antimicrobial resistance should be carefully appraised before scheduling a PB.

PATIENT SUMMARY

We reviewed the variety and incidence of complications after prostate biopsy. Even if frequent, complications seldom represent a problem for the patient. The most troublesome complications are infections. To minimize this risk, the patient's medical condition should be carefully evaluated before biopsy.

Optimization of prostate biopsy: review of technique and complications

A 12-core systematic biopsy that incorporates apical and far-lateral cores in the template distribution allows maximal cancer detection and avoidance of a repeat biopsy while minimizing the detection of insignificant prostate cancers. Magnetic resonance imaging-guided prostate biopsy has an evolving role in both initial and repeat prostate biopsy strategies, potentially improving sampling efficiency, increasing the detection of clinically significant cancers, and reducing the detection of insignificant cancers. Hematuria, hematospermia, and rectal bleeding are common complications of prostate needle biopsy, but are generally self-limiting and well tolerated. All men should receive antimicrobial prophylaxis before biopsy.

The role of transperineal template prostate biopsies in prostate cancer diagnosis in biopsy naïve men with PSA less than 20 ng ml(-1.)

BACKGROUND

To compare prostate cancer detection rates between transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) prostate biopsy and transperineal template prostate biopsy (TPTPB) in biopsy naïve men. TRUS biopsy is still regarded as gold standard for prostate cancer diagnosis. TPTPB has been shown to improve prostate cancer detection in men with rising PSA and previous negative TRUS biopsies. We carried out a prospective study performing both biopsies in the same group of men with a benign feeling digital rectal examination (DRE), PSA <20 ng ml(-1) and no previous prostate biopsies.

METHODS

A total of 50 patients with mean age of 67 years (range: 54-84), mean prostate volume 58 cc (range: 19-165) and mean PSA 8 ng l(-1) (range: 4-18) underwent standard 12-core TRUS biopsy followed immediately by 36-core TPTPB under general anaesthetic. We determined the prostate cancer detection rate between the two diagnostic modalities.

RESULTS

In total, 20/50 (40%) had benign pathology. Of 30/50 (60%) diagnosed with prostate cancer, 16 (32%) had positive results in both TRUS and TPTPB, whereas 14 (28%) had negative TRUS but positive TPTPB. No cancers were detected solely by TRUS biopsy. TRUS biopsy detected cancer in 32% versus 60% with TPTPB. In total, 19/30(63%) cancers detected by TPTPB had Gleason score > or =7.2 (4%) experienced urosepsis, 7 (14%) temporary urinary retention, 16 (32%) mild haematuria and 19 (38%) haematospermia.

CONCLUSIONS

TPTPB is associated with significantly higher prostate cancer detection rate than TRUS biopsies in biopsy naïve men with a benign feeling DRE and PSA <20 ng ml(-1). PSA appears to be better biomarker than previously thought.

Transperineal biopsy of the prostate--is this the future?

Transperineal prostate biopsy is re-emerging after decades of being an underused alternative to transrectal biopsy guided by transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS). Factors driving this change include possible improved cancer detection rates, improved sampling of the anteroapical regions of the prostate, a reduced risk of false negative results and a reduced risk of underestimating disease volume and grade. The increasing incidence of antimicrobial resistance and patients with diabetes mellitus who are at high risk of sepsis also favours transperineal biopsy as a sterile alternative to standard TRUS-guided biopsy. Factors limiting its use include increased time, training and financial constraints as well as the need for high-grade anaesthesia. Furthermore, the necessary equipment for transperineal biopsy is not widely available. However, the expansion of transperineal biopsy has been propagated by the increase in multiparametric MRI-guided biopsies, which often use the transperineal approach. Used with MRI imaging, transperineal biopsy has led to improvements in cancer detection rates, more-accurate grading of cancer severity and reduced risk of diagnosing clinically insignificant disease. Targeted biopsy under MRI guidance can reduce the number of cores required, reducing the risk of complications from needle biopsy.

Development of an ultrasound-guided technique for pudendal nerve block in cat cadavers

The objective of this prospective experimental cadaveric study was to develop an ultrasound-guided technique to perform an anaesthetic pudendal nerve block in male cats. Fifteen fresh cadavers were used for this trial. A detailed anatomical dissection was performed on one cat in order to scrutinise the pudendal nerve and its ramifications. In a second step, the cadavers of six cats were used to test three different ultrasonographic approaches to the pudendal nerve: the deep dorso-lateral, the superficial dorso-lateral and the median transperineal. Although none of the approaches allowed direct ultrasonographical identification of the pudendal nerve branches, the deep dorso-lateral was found to be the most advantageous one in terms of practicability and ability to identify useful and reliable landmarks. Based on these findings, the deep dorso-lateral approach was selected as technique of choice for tracer injections (0.1 ml 1% methylene blue injected bilaterally) in six cat cadavers distinct from those used for the ultrasonographical study. Anatomical dissection revealed a homogeneous spread of the tracer around the pudendal nerve sensory branches in all six cadavers. Finally, computed tomography was performed in two additional cadavers after injection of 0.3 ml/kg (0.15 ml/kg per each injection sites, left and right) contrast medium through the deep dorso-lateral approach in order to obtain a model of volume distribution applicable to local anaesthetics. Our findings in cat cadavers indicate that ultrasound-guided pudendal nerve block is feasible and could be proposed to provide peri-operative analgesia in clinical patients undergoing perineal urethrostomy.

3-D photoacoustic and pulse echo imaging of prostate tumor progression in the mouse window chamber

Understanding the tumor microenvironment is critical to characterizing how cancers operate and predicting their response to treatment. We describe a novel, high-resolution coregistered photoacoustic (PA) and pulse echo (PE) ultrasound system used to image the tumor microenvironment. Compared to traditional optical systems, the platform provides complementary contrast and important depth information. Three mice are implanted with a dorsal skin flap window chamber and injected with PC-3 prostate tumor cells transfected with green fluorescent protein. The ensuing tumor invasion is mapped during three weeks or more using simultaneous PA and PE imaging at 25 MHz, combined with optical and fluorescent techniques. Pulse echo imaging provides details of tumor structure and the surrounding environment with 100-μm(3) resolution. Tumor size increases dramatically with an average volumetric growth rate of 5.35 mm(3)/day, correlating well with 2-D fluorescent imaging (R = 0.97, p < 0.01). Photoacoustic imaging is able to track the underlying vascular network and identify hemorrhaging, while PA spectroscopy helps classify blood vessels according to their optical absorption spectrum, suggesting variation in blood oxygen saturation. Photoacoustic and PE imaging are safe, translational modalities that provide enhanced depth resolution and complementary contrast to track the tumor microenvironment, evaluate new cancer therapies, and develop molecular contrast agents in vivo.