Abstract
Introduction: Prostate biopsy (PB) is a typical daily practice method for the diagnosis of prostate cancer (PCa). This study aimed to compare the PCa detection rates and peri- and postoperative complications of PB among 3 residents and a consultant. Patients and Methods: A total of 343 patients who underwent PB between August 2018 and July 2019 were involved in this study. Residents were systematically trained for 2 weeks by a consultant for performing systematic biopsy (SB) and targeted biopsy (TB). And then, 3 residents and the consultant performed PB independently every quarter due to routine rotation in daily practice. The peri- and postoperative data were collected from a prospectively maintained database (www.pc-follow.cn). The primary outcome and secondary outcome were to compare the PCa detection rates and complications between the residents and consultant, respectively. Results: There was no significant difference between the residents and consultant in terms of overall PCa detection rates of SB and TB or further stratified by prostate-specific antigen value and prostate imaging reporting and data system (PI-RADS) scores. We found the consultant had more TB cores (175 cores vs. 86–114 cores, p = 0.043) and shorter procedural time (mean 16 min vs. 19.7–20.1 min, p < 0.001) versus the residents. The complication rate for the consultant was 6.7% and 5%–8.2% for the residents, respectively (p = 0.875). Conclusions: The residents could get similar PCa detection and complication rates compared with that of the consultant after a 2-week training. However, the residents still need more cases to shorten the time of the biopsy procedure.
References
1.
Bray
F
, Ferlay
J
, Soerjomataram
I
, Siegel
RL
, Torre
LA
, Jemal
A
. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries
. CA Cancer J Clin
. 2018 Nov
;68
(6
):394
–424
. .2.
Padhani
AR
, Weinreb
J
, Rosenkrantz
AB
, Villeirs
G
, Turkbey
B
, Barentsz
J
. Prostate imaging-reporting and data system steering committee: PI-RADS v2 status update and future directions
. Eur Urol
. 2019 Mar
;75
(3
):385
–96
. .3.
Schouten
MG
, van der Leest
M
, Pokorny
M
, Hoogenboom
M
, Barentsz
JO
, Thompson
LC
, Why and where do we miss significant prostate cancer with multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging followed by magnetic resonance-guided and transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy in biopsy-naïve Men?
Eur Urol
. 2017 Jun
;71
(6
):896
–903
. .4.
Drost
FH
, Osses
DF
, Nieboer
D
, Steyerberg
EW
, Bangma
CH
, Roobol
MJ
, Prostate MRI, with or without MRI-targeted biopsy, and systematic biopsy for detecting prostate cancer
. Cochrane Database Syst Rev
. 2019 Apr 25
;4
:CD012663
. .5.
Ahmed
HU
, El-Shater Bosaily
A
, Brown
LC
, Gabe
R
, Kaplan
R
, Parmar
MK
, Diagnostic accuracy of multi-parametric MRI and TRUS biopsy in prostate cancer (PROMIS): a paired validating confirmatory study
. Lancet
. 2017
;389
(10071
):815
–22
. .6.
Kasivisvanathan
V
, Rannikko
AS
, Borghi
M
, Panebianco
V
, Mynderse
LA
, Vaarala
MH
, MRI-targeted or standard biopsy for prostate-cancer diagnosis
. N Engl J Med
. 2018 May 10
;378
(19
):1767
–77
. .7.
Ahdoot
M
, Wilbur
AR
, Reese
SE
, Lebastchi
AH
, Mehralivand
S
, Gomella
PT
, MRI-targeted, systematic, and combined biopsy for prostate cancer diagnosis
. N Engl J Med
. 2020 Mar 5
;382
(10
):917
–28
. .8.
9.
Thomson
A
, Li
M
, Grummet
J
, Sengupta
S
. Transperineal prostate biopsy: a review of technique
. Transl Androl Urol
. 2020 Dec
;9
(6
):3009
–17
. .10.
Wegelin
O
, Exterkate
L
, van der Leest
M
, Kummer
JA
, Vreuls
W
, de Bruin
PC
, The FUTURE trial: a multicenter randomised controlled trial on target biopsy techniques based on magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of prostate cancer in patients with prior negative biopsies
. Eur Urol
. 2019 Apr
;75
(4
):582
–90
. .11.
Puech
P
, Rouvière
O
, Renard-Penna
R
, Villers
A
, Devos
P
, Colombel
M
, Prostate cancer diagnosis: multiparametric MR-targeted biopsy with cognitive and transrectal US-MR fusion guidance versus systematic biopsy: prospective multicenter study
. Radiology
. 2013 Aug
;268
(2
):461
–9
. .12.
Wegelin
O
, van Melick
HHE
, Hooft
L
, Bosch
JLHR
, Reitsma
HB
, Barentsz
JO
, Comparing three different techniques for magnetic resonance imaging-targeted prostate biopsies: a systematic review of in-bore versus magnetic resonance imaging-transrectal ultrasound fusion versus cognitive registration. Is there a preferred technique?
Eur Urol
. 2017 Apr
;71
(4
):517
–31
. .13.
Das
CJ
, Netaji
A
, Razik
A
, Verma
S
. MRI-targeted prostate biopsy: what radiologists should know
. Korean J Radiol
. 2020 Sep
;21
(9
):1087
–94
. .14.
Rouvière
O
, Puech
P
, Renard-Penna
R
, Claudon
M
, Roy
C
, Mège-Lechevallier
F
, Use of prostate systematic and targeted biopsy on the basis of multiparametric MRI in biopsy-naive patients (MRI-FIRST): a prospective, multicentre, paired diagnostic study
. Lancet Oncol
. 2019
;20
(1
):100
–9
. .15.
Kasabwala
K
, Patel
N
, Cricco-Lizza
E
, Shimpi
AA
, Weng
S
, Buchmann
RM
, The learning curve for magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound fusion-guided prostate biopsy
. Eur Urol Oncol
. 2019 Mar
;2
(2
):135
–40
. .16.
Mager
R
, Brandt
MP
, Borgmann
H
, Gust
KM
, Haferkamp
A
, Kurosch
M
. From novice to expert: analyzing the learning curve for MRI-transrectal ultrasonography fusion-guided transrectal prostate biopsy
. Int Urol Nephrol
. 2017 Sep
;49
(9
):1537
–44
. .17.
Halstuch
D
, Baniel
J
, Lifshitz
D
, Sela
S
, Ber
Y
, Margel
D
. Characterizing the learning curve of MRI-US fusion prostate biopsies
. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis
. 2019 Dec
;22
(4
):546
–51
. .18.
Wang
H
, Lin
H
, He
B
, Guo
X
, Zhou
Y
, Xi
P
, A novel perineal nerve block approach for transperineal prostate biopsy: an anatomical analysis-based randomized single-blind controlled trial
. Urology
. 2020 Dec
;146
:25
–31
.19.
He
BM
, Chen
R
, Shi
ZK
, Xiao
GA
, Li
HS
, Lin
HZ
, Trans-perineal template-guided mapping biopsy vs. freehand trans-perineal biopsy in Chinese patients with PSA < 20 ng/ml: similar cancer detection rate but different lesion detection rate
. Front Oncol
. 2019 Aug
;9
:758
.20.
Wang
HF
, Chen
R
, He
BM
, Qu
M
, Wang
Y
, Lin
HZ
, Initial experience with a novel method for cognitive transperineal magnetic resonance imaging-targeted prostate biopsy
. Asian J Androl
. 2020 Jul–Aug
;22
(4
):432
–6
. .21.
Meng
X
, Rosenkrantz
AB
, Huang
R
, Deng
FM
, Wysock
JS
, Bjurlin
MA
, The institutional learning curve of magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion targeted prostate biopsy: temporal improvements in cancer detection in 4 years
. J Urol
. 2018 Nov
;200
(5
):1022
–9
. .22.
Marra
G
, Zhuang
J
, Marquis
A
, Zhao
X
, Calleris
G
, Kan
Y
, Pain in men undergoing transperineal free-hand multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging fusion targeted biopsies under local anesthesia: outcomes and predictors from a multicenter study of 1,008 patients
. J Urol
. 2020 Dec
;204
(6
):1209
–15
. .23.
Pavlin
DJ
, Links
S
, Rapp
SE
, Nessly
ML
, Keyes
HJ
. Vaso-vagal reactions in an ambulatory surgery center
. Anesth Analg
. 1993 May
;76
(5
):931
–5
. .24.
Perán Teruel
M
, Lorenzo-Gómez
MF
, Veiga Canuto
N
, Padilla-Fernández
BY
, Valverde-Martínez
LS
, Migliorini
F
, Complications of transrectal prostate biopsy in our context. International multicenter study of 3350 patients
. Actas Urol Esp
. 2020 Apr
;44
(3
):196
–204
. .© 2021 S. Karger AG, Basel
2021
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.
