Transperineal Versus Transrectal Targeted Biopsy With Use of Electromagnetically-tracked MR/US Fusion Guidance Platform for the Detection of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer

Transperineal magnetic resonance imaging targeted biopsy versus transrectal route in the detection of prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has deeply altered the prostate biopsy strategy to detect prostate cancer. However, it is still debatable whether the detection rate differs between transrectal (TR) and transperineal (TP) MRI-targeted biopsy (MRI-TB). To compare the effectiveness of these two methods for detecting both overall prostate cancer (PCa) and clinically significant PCa (csPCa), We performed a review and meta-analysis.

METHODS

Until January 2023, we conducted a thorough search of Cochrane, Embase, Ovid, and PubMed. In total, 1482 references were identified, and 15 records were finally included. For PCa and csPCa discovered by TP and TR MRI-TB, we combined the relative sensitivity (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). The RR between the TP and TR routes was established.

RESULTS

Our study included 8826 patients in total and revealed that TP MRI-TB detected more PCa (RR 1.25 [95% CI 1.12, 1.39], p < 0.0001). In patients who underwent TP MRI-TB and TR MRI-TB at the same time or separately, TP MRI-TB had a greater detection rate of csPCa in per-patient analysis (one cohort (RR 1.33 [95% CI 1.09, 1.63], p = 0.005); two cohorts (RR 1.37 [95% CI 1.16, 1.61], p  = 0.0002)). However, the detection rate of csPCa between the TP route and the TR route was comparable in per-lesion analysis (RR 0.91 [95% CI 0.76, 1.08], p  = 0.28). Additionally, in the prostate's anterior region, we found that TP MRI-TB detected more csPCa (per-lesion (RR 1.52 [95% CI 1.04, 2.23], p  = 0.03); per-patient (RR 2.55 [95% CI 1.56, 4.16], p  = 0.0002)).

CONCLUSION

According to this comprehensive study, TP MRI-TB is more effective than TR MRI-TB at detecting PCa and csPCa. Significant results persisted for detecting csPCa located in the anterior zone. The results need to be taken carefully notwithstanding the heterogeneity among the included studies.

Is There an Impact of Transperineal Versus Transrectal Magnetic Resonance Imaging-targeted Biopsy in Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer Detection Rate? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

CONTEXT

It is unclear whether a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-targeted transperineal (TP) biopsy can improve the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa).

OBJECTIVE

To compare the MRI-targeted TP and transrectal (TR) approaches for csPCa detection.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A literature search was conducted using the PubMed/Medline, Embase, and Web of Science databases to identify reports published until February 2023. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines were followed to identify eligible studies. The primary outcome was the detection of csPCa (Gleason grade group ≥2). Sensitivity analyses were performed to investigate csPCa detection rates according to tumor location, Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) score, and type of fusion (cognitive or software based).

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Eleven studies met our inclusion criteria, and data from 3522 and 5140 patients who underwent, respectively, TR and TP MRI-targeted biopsies were reviewed. No statistically significant difference in the detection of csPCa was observed between the TR and TP approaches (odds ratio [OR] 1.11, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.98-1.25; p = 0.1). When stratifying patients according to lesion location, the TP approach was associated with higher csPCa detection in case of anterior (OR 2.17, 95% CI 1.46-3.22; p < 0.001) and apical (OR 1.86, 95% CI 1.14-3.03; p = 0.01) lesions. In the subgroup analysis based on PI-RADS score, the TP approach was associated with higher csPCa detection (OR 1.57, 95% CI 1.07-2.29; p = 0.02) in PI-RADS 4 lesions. Conversely, no difference was found in PI-RADS 3 and 5 lesions (p > 0.05). The main limitation was the retrospective design of most included studies.

CONCLUSIONS

No significant association was found between the prostate biopsy approach and csPCa detection rate when we considered all biopsy indications. The TP approach provides a detection advantage in anterior and apical tumors, arguing for a preferred use of the TP approach in these lesion locations.

PATIENT SUMMARY

The transperineal magnetic resonance imaging-targeted prostate biopsy approach appears to be more effective only for selected lesions. No clear benefit was seen for the transperineal approach in the overall population.

Transperineal vs transrectal magnetic resonance and ultrasound image fusion prostate biopsy: a pair-matched comparison

The objective of this study was to compare transperineal (TP) versus transrectal (TR) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) fusion prostate biopsy (PBx). Consecutive men who underwent prostate MRI followed by a systematic biopsy. Additional target biopsies were performed from Prostate Imaging Reporting & Data System (PIRADS) 3-5 lesions. Men who underwent TP PBx were matched 1:2 with a synchronous cohort undergoing TR PBx by PSA, Prostate volume (PV) and PIRADS score. Endpoint of the study was the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer (CSPCa; Grade Group ≥ 2). Univariate and multivariable analyses were performed. Results were considered statistically significant if p < 0.05. Overall, 504 patients met the inclusion criteria. A total of 168 TP PBx were pair-matched to 336 TR PBx patients. Baseline demographics and imaging characteristics were similar between the groups. Per patient, the CSPCa detection was 2.1% vs 6.3% (p = 0.4) for PIRADS 1-2, and 59% vs 60% (p = 0.9) for PIRADS 3-5, on TP vs TR PBx, respectively. Per lesion, the CSPCa detection for PIRADS 3 (21% vs 16%; p = 0.4), PIRADS 4 (51% vs 44%; p = 0.8) and PIRADS 5 (76% vs 84%; p = 0.3) was similar for TP vs TR PBx, respectively. However, the TP PBx showed a longer maximum cancer core length (11 vs 9 mm; p = 0.02) and higher cancer core involvement (83% vs 65%; p < 0.001) than TR PBx. Independent predictors for CSPCa detection were age, PSA, PV, abnormal digital rectal examination findings, and PIRADS 3-5. Our study demonstrated transperineal MRI/TRUS fusion PBx provides similar CSPCa detection, with larger prostate cancer core length and percent of core involvement, than transrectal PBx.

Up-to-Date Imaging and Diagnostic Techniques for Prostate Cancer: A Literature Review

Prostate cancer (PCa) faces great challenges in early diagnosis, which often leads not only to unnecessary, invasive procedures, but to over-diagnosis and treatment as well, thus highlighting the need for modern PCa diagnostic techniques. The review aims to provide an up-to-date summary of chronologically existing diagnostic approaches for PCa, as well as their potential to improve clinically significant PCa (csPCa) diagnosis and to reduce the proliferation and monitoring of PCa. Our review demonstrates the primary outcomes of the most significant studies and makes comparisons across the diagnostic efficacies of different PCa tests. Since prostate biopsy, the current mainstream PCa diagnosis, is an invasive procedure with a high risk of post-biopsy complications, it is vital we dig out specific, sensitive, and accurate diagnostic approaches in PCa and conduct more studies with milestone findings and comparable sample sizes to validate and corroborate the findings.

A Systematic Review of the Current Status of Magnetic Resonance-Ultrasound Images Fusion Software Platforms for Transperineal Prostate Biopsies

Given this new context, our objective is to recognize the suitability of the currently available software for image fusion and the reported series using the transperineal route, as well as to generate new evidence on the complementarity of the directed and systematic biopsies, which has been established through the transrectal approach.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

This systematic review, registered in Prospero (CRD42022375619), began with a bibliographic search that was carried out in PubMed, Cochrane, and Google Scholar databases. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) criteria and the studied eligibility based on the Participants, Intervention, Comparator, and Outcomes (PICO) strategy were followed. Warp analysis of selected studies was performed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) tool. In addition, a Google search of all currently available fusion platforms was performed. Our Google search found 11 different commercially available robots to perform transperineal image fusion biopsies, of which 10 devices have published articles supporting their diagnostic effectiveness in transperineal prostate biopsies.

RESULTS

A total of 30 articles were selected and the characteristics and results of the biopsies of 11,313 patients were analyzed. The pooled mean age was 66.5 years (63-69). The mean pooled PSA level was 7.8 ng/mL (5.7-10.8). The mean pooled prostate volume was 45.4 cc. (34-56). The mean pooled PSA density was 0.17 (0.12-0.27). The overall cancer detection rate for all prostate cancers was 61.4%, while for csPCa it was 47.8%. PCa detection rate was more effective than that demonstrated in the systematic transrectal biopsy. However, the detection of csPCa in the systematic biopsy was only 9.5% in the reported series. To standardize our review, we grouped prostate cancer screening results according to the population studied and the software used. When the same populations were compared between elastic and rigid software, we found that rigid biopsies had a higher csPCa detection rate than biopsies with elastic fusion systems.

CONCLUSION

Platforms performing prostate biopsy using transperineal image fusion have better detection rates of csPCa than systematic transrectal biopsies. Rigid fusion systems have a better csPCa detection rate than elastic ones. We found no diagnostic differences between the different types of robotic systems currently available. The complementarity of systematic biopsy has also been demonstrated in transperineal imaging fusion biopsies.

Development, comparison, and validation of four intelligent, practical machine learning models for patients with prostate-specific antigen in the gray zone

Purpose

Machine learning prediction models based on LogisticRegression, XGBoost, GaussianNB, and LGBMClassifier for patients in the prostate-specific antigen gray zone are to be developed and compared, identifying valuable predictors. Predictive models are to be integrated into actual clinical decisions.

Methods

Patient information was collected from December 01, 2014 to December 01, 2022 from the Department of Urology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University. Patients with a pathological diagnosis of prostate hyperplasia or prostate cancer (any PCa) and having a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level of 4-10 ng/mL before prostate puncture were included in the initial information collection. Eventually, 756 patients were selected. Age, total prostate-specific antigen (tPSA), free prostate-specific antigen (fPSA), fPSA/tPSA, prostate volume (PV), prostate-specific antigen density (PSAD), (fPSA/tPSA)/PSAD, and the prostate MRI results of these patients were recorded. After univariate and multivariate logistic analyses, statistically significant predictors were screened to build and compare machine learning models based on LogisticRegression, XGBoost, GaussianNB, and LGBMClassifier to determine more valuable predictors.

Results

Machine learning prediction models based on LogisticRegression, XGBoost, GaussianNB, and LGBMClassifier exhibit higher predictive power than individual metrics. The area under the curve (AUC) (95% CI), accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and F1 score of the LogisticRegression machine learning prediction model were 0.932 (0.881-0.983), 0.792, 0.824, 0.919, 0.652, 0.920, and 0.728, respectively; of the XGBoost machine learning prediction model were 0.813 (0.723-0.904), 0.771, 0.800, 0.768, 0.737, 0.793 and 0.767, respectively; of the GaussianNB machine learning prediction model were 0.902 (0.843-0.962), 0.813, 0.875, 0.819, 0.600, 0.909, and 0.712, respectively; and of the LGBMClassifier machine learning prediction model were 0.886 (0.809-0.963), 0.833, 0.882, 0.806, 0.725, 0.911, and 0.796, respectively. The LogisticRegression machine learning prediction model has the highest AUC among all prediction models, and the difference between the AUC of the LogisticRegression prediction model and those of XGBoost, GaussianNB, and LGBMClassifier is statistically significant (p < 0.001).

Conclusion

Machine learning prediction models based on LogisticRegression, XGBoost, GaussianNB, and LGBMClassifier algorithms exhibit superior predictability for patients in the PSA gray area, with the LogisticRegression model yielding the best prediction. The aforementioned predictive models can be used for actual clinical decision-making.​.

Safety and efficacy of software-assisted MRI-TRUS fusion-guided transperineal prostate biopsy in an outpatient setting using local anaesthesia

PURPOSE

To evaluate diagnostic accuracy, safety, and efficiency of an MRI-TRUS fusion-guided transperineal prostate biopsy method in an outpatient setting under local anaesthesia.

METHODS

Patients undergoing transperineal prostate biopsy were included from March 2021 to May 2022. Biopsies were performed under local anaesthesia in an outpatient setting, using specialised fusion software. Primary outcome was (clinically significant) cancer detection rate. Secondary outcomes were procedure time, patient discomfort during the procedure and complication rate.

RESULTS

We included 203 male patients (69 years +-SD 8.2) with PI-RADS score > 2. In total 223 suspicious lesions were targeted. Overall cancer detection rate and clinically significant cancer detection rate were 73.5% and 60.1%, respectively. (Clinically significant) cancer detection rates in PI-RADS 3, 4 and 5 lesions were 46.4% (23.2%), 78.5% (66.1%) and 93.5% (89.1%), respectively. Mean duration of the procedure including fusion, targeted and systematic biopsies was 22.5 min. Patients rated injection of local anaesthesia on a numeric pain rating scale on average 3.7/10 (SD 2.09) and biopsy core sampling 1.6/10 (SD 1.65). No patient presented with acute urinary retention on follow-up consultation. Two (1%) patients presented with infectious complications. Four (2%) patients experienced a vasovagal reaction.

CONCLUSION

Transperineal targeted biopsy with MRI-TRUS fusion software has high overall and clinically significant cancer detection rates. The method is well tolerated under local anaesthesia and in an outpatient setting.

Foggia Prostate Cancer Risk Calculator 2.0: A Novel Risk Calculator including MRI and Bladder Outlet Obstruction Parameters to Reduce Unnecessary Biopsies

Risk calculator (RC) combining PSA with other clinical information can help to better select patients at risk of prostate cancer (PCa) for prostate biopsy. The present study aimed to develop a new Pca RC, including MRI and bladder outlet obstruction parameters (BOOP). The ability of these parameters in predicting PCa and clinically significant PCa (csPCa: ISUP GG ≥ 2) was assessed by binary logistic regression. A total of 728 patients were included from two institutions. Of these, 395 (54.3%) had negative biopsies and 161 (22.11%) and 172 (23.6%) had a diagnosis of ISUP GG1 PCa and csPCa. The two RC ultimately included age, PSA, DRE, prostate volume (pVol), post-voided residual urinary volume (PVR), and PIRADS score. Regarding BOOP, higher prostate volumes (csPCa: OR 0.98, CI 0.97,0.99) and PVR ≥ 50 mL (csPCa: OR 0.27, CI 0.15, 0.47) were protective factors for the diagnosis of any PCa and csPCa. AUCs after internal validation were 0.78 (0.75, 0.82) and 0.82 (0.79, 0.86), respectively. Finally, decision curves analysis demonstrated higher benefit compared to the first-generation calculator and MRI alone. These novel RC based on MRI and BOOP may help to better select patient for prostate biopsy after prostate MRI.

A comparative study of transperineal software-assisted magnetic resonance/ultrasound fusion biopsy and transrectal cognitive fusion biopsy of the prostate

BACKGROUND

The advantages and disadvantages of transperineal and transrectal biopsies remain controversial in the era of prostate targeted biopsy. In this study, we compared the cancer detection and complication rates of transperineal magnetic resonance/ultrasound (MR/US) fusion biopsy and transrectal cognitive fusion biopsy of the prostate.

METHODS

This was a comparative study of two prospectively collected cohorts. Men with clinically suspected prostate cancer and prostate imaging reporting and data system (PI-RADS) score ≥ 3 lesions on multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) were enrolled. They underwent either transperineal software fusion biopsy or transrectal cognitive fusion biopsy and systematic biopsy. The detection rates of any prostate cancer and clinically significant prostate cancer (csPC, defined as Gleason score ≥ 3 + 4) and the complication rates between both groups were analysed.

RESULTS

Ninety-two and 85 patients underwent transperineal software fusion and transrectal cognitive fusion biopsies, respectively. The detection rate for any prostate cancer was similar between both groups (60.8% vs. 56.4%, p = 0.659). In terms of csPC detection, transperineal fusion biopsy outperformed transrectal fusion biopsy (52.2% vs. 36.5%, p = 0.036). In multivariate regression analysis, age, PI-RADS score > 3, and transperineal route were significant predictors of csPC. Meanwhile, transperineal biopsy resulted in a higher rate of urinary retention than transrectal biopsy (18.5% vs. 4.7%, p = 0.009). No serious infectious complications were noted, although a patient developed sepsis after transrectal biopsy.

CONCLUSIONS

Transperineal software fusion biopsy provided a higher csPC detection rate than transrectal cognitive fusion biopsy and carried minimal risk for infectious complications in patients with MRI-visible prostate lesions.

Transrectal Ultrasound in Prostate Cancer: Current Utilization, Integration with mpMRI, HIFU and Other Emerging Applications

Transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) has been an invaluable tool in the assessment of prostate size, anatomy and aiding in prostate cancer (PCa) diagnosis for decades. Emerging techniques warrant an investigation into the efficacy of TRUS, how it compares to new techniques, and options to increase the accuracy of prostate cancer diagnosis. Currently, TRUS is used to guide both transrectal and transperineal biopsy approaches with similar cancer detection rates, but lower rates of infection have been reported with the transperineal approach, while lower rates of urinary retention are often reported with the transrectal approach. Multiparametric MRI has substantial benefits for prostate cancer diagnosis and triage such as lesion location, grading, and can be combined with TRUS to perform fusion biopsies targeting specific lesions. Micro-ultrasound generates higher resolution images that traditional ultrasound and has been shown effective at diagnosing PCa, giving it the potential to become a future standard of care. Finally, high-intensity focused ultrasound focal therapy administered via TRUS has been shown to offer safe and effective short-term oncological control for localized disease with low morbidity, and the precise nature makes it a viable option for salvage and repeat therapy.

Comparison of transperineal and transrectal targeted prostate biopsy using Mahalanobis distance matching within propensity score caliper method: A multicenter study of Turkish Urooncology Association

OBJECTIVE

To compare the clinically significant prostate cancer (csPC)-detecting results of transperineal and transrectal targeted biopsy (TPTB and TRTB, respectively) by performing matching analysis.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This study has used the PC and prostate biopsy database from the Turkish Urooncology Association. A total of 1143 patients with Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) with ≥3 lesions on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) and who had received a software-guided transperineal/transrectal MRI/transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) fusion prostate biopsy with concomitant standard systematic 12-core biopsy were included in this study. csPC detection rates of the TP and TR approaches were compared following Mahalanobis distance matching within propensity score caliper method. The following four variables were selected as covariates for the matching procedure: age, digital rectal examination findings, PSA density, and the index lesion PI-RADS score.

RESULTS

The matched sample included 508 TR and 276 TP patients. In both the TP and the TR groups, targeted biopsy was superior to systematic biopsy in detecting csPC (27.5% vs. 24.6%, p < 0.001 and 19.5% vs. 16.3%, p < 0.0001, respectively). Both TPTB and TP systematic biopsy was found to be superior to TRTB and TR systematic biopsy in terms of csPC detection (27.5% vs. 19.5%, p = 0.012 and 24.6% vs. 16.3%, p = 0.006). In patients with an anterior index lesion, an apical index lesion, and a larger prostate, the superiority of TPTB to TRTB was found to be more prominent in terms of csPC detection (37.8% vs. 18.3%, p = 0.044; 34.6% vs. 14.7%, p = 0.002; and 25% vs. 5.1%, p = 0.033, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Targeted biopsy was found to be superior to systematic biopsy in detecting csPC in both the TP and the TR approaches. The TP approach is preferred because of its clear superiority in detecting csPC in targeted biopsy, especially in patients with anterior and apical lesions and with larger prostates.

Transrectal Ultrasound-Guided Biopsy Should Continue to Be a Standard of Care for The Detection of Prostate Cancer

For men choosing to screen for prostate cancer (PCa), biopsy remains critical for diagnosis. While transrectal ultrasound-guided (TRUS) biopsy has been the standard of care for many years, recent concerns regarding post-procedural infection have led to increased interest in prostatic sampling via the transperineal (TP) approach. However, TRUS biopsy features important patient-related and physician/practice-related advantages compared to the TP method, and there are several useful strategies to effectively mitigate infectious concerns. The benefits associated with TRUS biopsy, particularly patient comfort and efficient clinical workflow, are further accentuated by several key shortcomings associated with switching to the TP approach. Herein, we present an argument in favor of maintaining TRUS biopsy as standard practice, discussing significant topics including infectious complications, practice workflow and cost, cancer detection rates, and patient experience.

Developments in optimizing transperineal prostate biopsy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Prostate biopsy is a very commonly performed office procedure leading to the diagnosis of the most prevalent solid-organ malignancy in American men. Although the transrectal technique for prostate biopsy remains the gold standard, there is increasing interest in the transperineal approach as it offers a clean, percutaneous approach that significantly decreases the risk for infection. In this review, we discuss emerging developments in transperineal prostate biopsy that may optimize the way biopsies are performed in clinical practice.

RECENT FINDINGS

Similarly, to transrectal biopsy, the transperineal approach also allows for the performance of systematic and MRI-targeted biopsy cores. As transperineal biopsy obviates the translocation of rectal bacteria to the prostate or bloodstream, in contrast to transrectal biopsy, it is feasible to forgo peri-procedural antibiotics in accordance with professional guidelines. This may attenuate antimicrobial resistance that may be associated with augmented prophylaxis. In addition, although transperineal biopsy may be traditionally performed under general anesthesia using a template grid, it may also be performed freehand under local anesthesia or sedation. Avoiding prophylactic antibiotics and general anesthesia as well as reducing infections/hospitalizations for transperineal biopsy scaled nationally will likely result in significant healthcare savings.

SUMMARY

Transperineal biopsy with combined systematic and MRI-targeted cores, offers several advantages over conventional transrectal biopsy. Transperineal biopsy under local anesthesia and without periprocedural antibiotic is emerging as a promising method for prostate cancer diagnosis and surveillance.

Analysis of the usefulness of magnetic resonance imaging and clinical parameters in the detection of prostate cancer in the first systematic biopsy combined with targeted cognitive biopsy

Introduction

The study aimed to assess the suitability of multiparametric magnetic resonance prostate imaging (mpMRI) in combination with clinical parameters [prostate-specific antigen (PSA), digital rectal examination (DRE)] in the identification of men at risk of the presence of prostate cancer (PCa) and clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa, Gleason Score ≥3+4) in the cognitive fusion with systematic prostate biopsy.

Material and methods

We retrospectively evaluated a population of 215 biopsy – naive patients with a clinical suspicion of prostate cancer. The results of mpMRI, DRE, PSA and biopsy were analyzed. MpMRI of the prostate according to the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) v.2.0 scheme preceded cognitive fusion and systematic transrectal prostate biopsy. Uni- and multivariable logistic regression analysis (MVA) was used to identify the variables determining the risk of detecting PCa overall and csPCa.

Results

In MVA, it was established that the combination of variables such as PSA level [odds ratio (OR) 1.195; p = 0.002], PI-RADS ≥3 (OR 7.7; p = 0.002), prostate volume (OR 0.98; p = 0.017) significantly determines the probability of PCa detection in biopsy, while for csPCa it is PSA level (OR 1.14; p = 0.004), DRE (+) (OR 5.75; p <0.001), PI-RADS ≥4 (OR 6.5; p <0.001). Analysis of mpMRI diagnostic value for PI-RADS ≥4 revealed better sensitivity (88.9% vs 82.6%) and better negative predictive value (NPV) (94.5% vs 82.4%) for detection of csPCa than for PCa overall.

Conclusions

MpMRI results combining with DRE and PSA parameters help to identify men at high – or low risk of csPCa detection in the first – time biopsy.

Rationale and protocol for randomized study of transrectal and transperineal prostate biopsy efficacy and complications (ProBE-PC study)

BACKGROUND

Rrisk of infection and hospitalization after transrectal prostate biopsy (TRBx) has been increasing worldwide. Several modified antibiotic regimens have met with variable success in preventing such infections. Transperineal prostate biopsy (TPBx) is increasingly recommended as the preferred alternative due to a potentially lower risk of post-biopsy infections. Aim of this review is to define the magnitude of post-biopsy complications and the effectiveness of preventive strategies, including TPBx approach.

METHODS

We performed a focused review of literature on infectious complications after TRBx and detailed the use of various preventive measures. We summarized the effectiveness of several preventive measures, including TPBx, and outlined the inconsistencies in reported outcomes. We identified potential barriers to the uptake of TPBx, including the gap in knowledge such as lack of high-quality evidence.

RESULTS

Several antibiotic prophylaxis protocols, including targeted and augmented, have been utilized for TRBx without demonstrating a clearly superior regimen. Of the non-antibiotic preventive measure, povidone-iodine rectal prep appears to be most effective strategy. Several single-arm cohort studies have reported very low rates of infections after TPBx and demonstrated the feasibility of an office-based procedure. However, barriers to the adoption of TPBx exist including retrospective data, and conflicting results showing minimal reduction in complications with increased burden of resource utilization. Presently, there are no randomized studies comparing the infectious complications after TRBx and TPBx. We discuss the rationale and protocol for a randomized controlled trial to determine the comparative effectiveness of biopsy techniques.

CONCLUSIONS

TPBx approach has the potential to lower the rate of post-biopsy infections and hospitalizations. However, there are several barriers to widespread adoption of this approach including inconsistencies in reported outcomes and lack of Level-1 evidence. Randomized controlled studies are required to directly compare the infectious complications associated with each biopsy procedure.

Monoprophylaxis With Cephalosporins for Transrectal Prostate Biopsy After the Fluoroquinolone-Era: A Multi-Institutional Comparison of Severe Infectious Complications

Background

To compare severe infectious complication rates after transrectal prostate biopsies between cephalosporins and fluoroquinolones for antibiotic monoprophylaxis.

Material and Methods

In the multi-institutional cohort, between November 2014 and July 2020 patients received either cefotaxime (single dose intravenously), cefpodoxime (multiple doses orally) or fluoroquinolones (multiple-doses orally or single dose intravenously) for transrectal prostate biopsy prophylaxis. Data were prospectively acquired and retrospectively analyzed. Severe infectious complications were evaluated within 30 days after biopsy. Logistic regression models predicted biopsy-related infectious complications according to antibiotic prophylaxis, application type and patient- and procedure-related risk factors.

Results

Of 793 patients, 132 (16.6%) received a single dose of intravenous cefotaxime and were compared to 119 (15%) who received multiple doses of oral cefpodoxime and 542 (68.3%) who received fluoroquinolones as monoprophylaxis. The overall incidence of severe infectious complications was 1.0% (n=8). No significant differences were observed between the three compared groups (0.8% vs. 0.8% vs. 1.1%, p=0.9). The overall rate of urosepsis was 0.3% and did not significantly differ between the three compared groups as well.

Conclusion

Monoprophylaxis with third generation cephalosporins was efficient in preventing severe infectious complications after prostate biopsy. Single intravenous dose of cefotaxime and multiday regimen of oral cefpodoxime showed a low incidence of infectious complications <1%. No differences were observed in comparison to fluoroquinolones.

MRI Screening and MRI/US Fusion-Guided Transperineal Biopsy in Detecting Prostate Cancer

OBJECTIVE

Systematic biopsy plays a vital role in diagnosing prostate cancer, but it can lead to misdiagnoses or undertreatment. Advances in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and its guided targeting technology provide the possibility of improving the use of biopsies. This study aimed to evaluate the performance of MRI screening and MRI/ultrasound (MRI/US) fusion-guided transperineal biopsy in the detection of prostate cancer.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective study on patients with suspected prostate cancer in the Kunshan Hospital Affiliated with Jiangsu University from January 2017 to December 2019. All of the patients underwent MRI examinations, followed by a systematic biopsy (either alone or in combination with MRI/US fusion-guided targeted biopsy, based on MRI-visible lesions). We evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of MRI screening and compared biopsy methods by considering sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve (AUC) values.

RESULTS

A total of 157 patients were enrolled, including 112 patients with MRI-visible lesions and 45 patients without MRI-visible lesions. The cancer detection rate (CDR) was higher in patients with MRI-visible lesions (P < 0.001); however, the serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) indicators were similar (P > 0.05). The AUC of MRI was 0.63, which was superior to the AUC values of ultrasound (AUC = 0.55, P = 0.031) and digital rectal examination (AUC = 0.52, P = 0.041) for screening prostate cancer. Both overall CDR and clinically significant prostate cancer detection rates were improved if we combined systematic biopsy and MRI/US fusion-guided targeted biopsy procedures.

CONCLUSION

Overall, prior MRI screening may serve as a classifier for avoiding the overuse of biopsies. A combination of systematic and MRI/US fusion-guided targeted biopsy procedures offers an optimal regimen for detecting prostate cancer.

Comparative Effectiveness of Techniques in Targeted Prostate Biopsy

Simple Summary

Prostate cancer is one of the most common cancers in men. Traditionally, prostate cancer is diagnosed via transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy, using a systematic random template. Using multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging, lesions suspicious for prostate cancer can be identified, and subsequently targeted on biopsy, allowing for increased diagnostic accuracy. This article reviewed the current literature surrounding various types of targeted biopsy, such as transperineal biopsy, allowing for comparison not only between targeted biopsy and systematic biopsy, but also between different varieties of targeted biopsy.

Abstract

In this review, we evaluated literature regarding different modalities for multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) and mpMRI-targeted biopsy (TB) for the detection of prostate cancer (PCa). We identified studies evaluating systematic biopsy (SB) and TB in the same patient, thereby allowing each patient to serve as their own control. Although the evidence supports the accuracy of TB, there is still a proportion of clinically significant PCa (csPCa) that is detected only in SB, indicating the importance of maintaining SB in the diagnostic pathway, albeit with additional cost and morbidity. There is a growing subset of data which supports the role of TB alone, which may allow for increased efficiency and decreased complications. We also compared the literature on transrectal (TR) vs. transperineal (TP) TB. Although further high-level evidence is necessary, current evidence supports similar csPCa detection rate for both approaches. We also evaluated various TB techniques such as cognitive fusion biopsy (COG-TB) and in-bore biopsy (IB-TB). COG-TB has comparable detection rates to software fusion, but is operator-dependent and may have reduced accuracy for smaller lesions. IB-TB may allow for greater precision as lesions are directly targeted; however, this is costly and time-consuming, and does not account for MRI-invisible lesions.