Safety and efficacy of Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) in patients with previous transperineal biopsy (TPB): outcomes from a dual-centre case-control study

Background

We investigated the surgical feasibility, safety and effectiveness of 50 W (low power) Holmium Laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) in patients who have undergone previous template biopsy of the prostate (TPB).

Methods

Data encompassing pre-operative baseline characteristics, intra-operative measures and post-operative outcomes was collected for 109 patients undergoing HoLEP across two UK centres. Patients were stratified into two groups; group 1 (n = 24) had undergone previous TPB were compared with ‘controls’ (no previous TPB) in group 2 (n = 85). The primary outcome was successful HoLEP.

Results

There were no statistically significant differences in either key baseline characteristics or mass of prostate enucleated between groups 1 and 2. There was no statistically significant difference in enucleation or morcellation times parameters between the two groups other than enucleation efficiency in favour of group 1 (p = 0.024). Functional outcomes improved, without any statistically significant difference, in both groups.

Conclusions

In patients with a previous TPB, HoLEP is surgically feasible, safe and effective. TPB should not be considered a contraindication to HoLEP. Our work provides a strong foundation for further research in this area.

Factors influencing urinary retention after transperineal template biopsy of the prostate: outcomes from a regional cancer centre

INTRODUCTION

Multi-parametric MRI (MP-MRI) prior to prostate biopsy is the investigation of choice for an elevated age-related PSA and abnormal digital rectal examination. MP-MRI in combination with transperineal template mapping biopsy has facilitated the development of the concept of targeted biopsies, either cognitively or with software fusion. Urinary retention is a recognised complication of transperineal prostate biopsy, with reported incidence being 1.6-11.4%. We present patient and procedure-related factors, which influence occurrence of urinary retention after transperineal template biopsy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Retrospective data collection of 243 consecutive cases of transperineal template biopsies performed at a single institution were recorded and analysed. Biopsies were taken using a standard 5-mm template in 4-6 sectors, depending on the prostate volume.

RESULTS

31/243 (12.8%) patients developed urinary retention, defined as patient discomfort and inability to micturate and bladder scan of ≥ 600 ml. Patients in the retention group were significantly older (mean 68.7 vs. 65.8 years, P = 0.034). Prostate volume was significantly greater in comparison with the non-retention group (mean 75.4 vs. 57.2 cc, P = 0.0016). The number of biopsies taken was positively correlated with urinary retention (median 35 vs. 32 biopsies, P = 0.045), and this was independent of prostate size (R² = 0.2). Presenting PSA, pre-operative flow and histopathological outcome were independent of urinary retention.

CONCLUSIONS

Factors resulting in an increased risk of urinary retention are advancing age (> 68.7 years); a larger prostate volume (> 75 cc); greater number of biopsies (> 35); greater severity of lower urinary tract symptoms prior to biopsy and diabetes. Targeted biopsies alone, instead of a full template, may avoid urinary retention in the high-risk groups identified.

Handling and reporting of transperineal template prostate biopsy in Europe: a web-based survey by the European Network of Uropathology (ENUP)

Transperineal template prostate biopsies (TTPB) are performed for assessments after unexpected negative transrectal ultrasound biopsies (TRUSB), correlation with imaging findings and during active surveillance. The impact of TTPBs on pathology has not been analysed. The European Network of Uropathology (ENUP) distributed a survey on TTPB, including how specimens were received, processed and analysed. Two hundred forty-four replies were received from 22 countries with TTPBs seen by 68.4% of the responders (n = 167). Biopsies were received in more than 12 pots in 35.2%. The number of cores embedded per cassette varied between 1 (39.5%) and 3 or more (39.5%). Three levels were cut in 48.3%, between 2 and 3 serial sections in 57.2% and unstained spare sections in 45.1%. No statistical difference was observed with TRUSB management. The number of positive cores was always reported and the majority gave extent per core (82.3%), per region (67.1%) and greatest involvement per core (69.4%). Total involvement in the whole series and continuous/discontinuous infiltrates were reported in 42.2 and 45.4%, respectively. The majority (79.4%) reported Gleason score in each site or core, and 59.6% gave an overall score. A minority (28.5%) provided a map or a diagram. For 19%, TTPB had adversely affected laboratory workload with only 27% managing to negotiate extra costs. Most laboratories process samples thoroughly and report TTPB similarly to TRUSB. Although TTPB have caused considerable extra work, it remains uncosted in most centres. Guidance is needed for workload impact and minimum standards of processing if TTPB work continues to increase.

Pathological Concordance between Prostate Biopsies and Radical Prostatectomy Using Transperineal Sector Mapping Biopsies: Validation and Comparison with Transrectal Biopsies

Background/Aims/Objectives: Our aim was to evaluate the accuracy of systematic transperineal sector mapping biopsy (TPSMB) in predicting Gleason score (GS) at radical prostatectomy (RP), to compare its accuracy with standard transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsies (TRUS) and to establish the clinical impact of discordance between biopsies and RP on subsequent surgical management.

METHODS

Two hundred fifty-five patients from 2008 to 2013 who underwent RP following TPSMB (n = 204) or TRUS (n = 51), were included in this retrospective multi-institutional study. Concordance between biopsies and RPs GS was assessed both as percentages and with Cohen's Kappa coefficient. All mismatches between biopsies and RP were assessed for significance by 3 urologists using the Delphi method.

RESULTS

No differences were present among the groups. Concordance between biopsy and RP GS was 75.49% for TPSMB and 64.70% for TRUS. Kappa coefficient was 0.42 and 0.39 respectively. The Delphi method showed lower clinical impact of GS discordances for TPSMB with 7.8% of patients having significant change, thus being potentially more suitable for other treatment modalities, compared to TRUS (13.7%).

CONCLUSIONS

TPSMB had a higher accuracy for predicting the GS grade at RP showing superior GS concordance compared with standard TRUS. TPSMB provides an effective technique for systematic prostate biopsy to evaluate overall prostate cancer GS.