Assessment of complications after transperineal and transrectal prostate biopsy using a risk-stratified pathway identifying patients at risk for post-biopsy infections.

IF 1.4 4区 医学 Q3 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY
Sebastian Berg, Karl Heinrich Tully, Vincent Hoffmann, Henning Bahlburg, Florian Roghmann, Guido Müller, Joachim Noldus, Moritz Reike
{"title":"Assessment of complications after transperineal and transrectal prostate biopsy using a risk-stratified pathway identifying patients at risk for post-biopsy infections.","authors":"Sebastian Berg,&nbsp;Karl Heinrich Tully,&nbsp;Vincent Hoffmann,&nbsp;Henning Bahlburg,&nbsp;Florian Roghmann,&nbsp;Guido Müller,&nbsp;Joachim Noldus,&nbsp;Moritz Reike","doi":"10.1080/21681805.2023.2168049","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Evidence of transperineal (TP) superiority over transrectal (TR) biopsy is growing due to lower infectious complication rates. However, TR biopsy is the most common procedure, and it seems that a cross-over to TP is delayed by logistical challenges such as costs, complexity, and lack of experience. We investigate whether well-selected patients without any risk factors may further undergo TR biopsy if all precautions to avoid infections are warranted.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Data were collected in our academic institution between August 2021 and March 2022 and after clinical implementation of the currently updated European Association of Urology guideline recommendations on the performance of prostate biopsy. Patients underwent either TP or TR biopsy according to a riskstratification based on risk factors of infectious complications. Follow-up asked for post-biopsy complications. Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting (IPTW) propensity score was used to balance baseline characteristics. Complications were subdivided into infectious and non-infectious complications.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In total, 294 patients were included with 161 patients undergoing TR vs. 133 patients undergoing TP biopsy. Complication rates were 2.2% for TP vs. 5.5% for TR biopsy concerning all complications. Infectious complication rates only were 0.7% for TP vs. 1.8% for TR biopsy. After IPTW adjustment, differences were statistically significant different (<i>p</i> = 0.01).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our study revealed that even in a well-selected patient cohort with presumably lower risk of infectious complications, TR biopsy leads to more post-biopsy complications than TP biopsy. This conclusion should motivate the urological community to switch to TP biopsy.</p>","PeriodicalId":21542,"journal":{"name":"Scandinavian Journal of Urology","volume":"57 1-6","pages":"41-46"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Scandinavian Journal of Urology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21681805.2023.2168049","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Evidence of transperineal (TP) superiority over transrectal (TR) biopsy is growing due to lower infectious complication rates. However, TR biopsy is the most common procedure, and it seems that a cross-over to TP is delayed by logistical challenges such as costs, complexity, and lack of experience. We investigate whether well-selected patients without any risk factors may further undergo TR biopsy if all precautions to avoid infections are warranted.

Materials and methods: Data were collected in our academic institution between August 2021 and March 2022 and after clinical implementation of the currently updated European Association of Urology guideline recommendations on the performance of prostate biopsy. Patients underwent either TP or TR biopsy according to a riskstratification based on risk factors of infectious complications. Follow-up asked for post-biopsy complications. Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting (IPTW) propensity score was used to balance baseline characteristics. Complications were subdivided into infectious and non-infectious complications.

Results: In total, 294 patients were included with 161 patients undergoing TR vs. 133 patients undergoing TP biopsy. Complication rates were 2.2% for TP vs. 5.5% for TR biopsy concerning all complications. Infectious complication rates only were 0.7% for TP vs. 1.8% for TR biopsy. After IPTW adjustment, differences were statistically significant different (p = 0.01).

Conclusion: Our study revealed that even in a well-selected patient cohort with presumably lower risk of infectious complications, TR biopsy leads to more post-biopsy complications than TP biopsy. This conclusion should motivate the urological community to switch to TP biopsy.

评估经会阴和经直肠前列腺活检后的并发症,使用风险分层途径识别活检后感染风险的患者。
导读:越来越多的证据表明,经会阴(TP)活检优于经直肠(TR)活检,因为其感染并发症发生率较低。然而,TR活检是最常见的手术,似乎由于成本、复杂性和缺乏经验等后勤挑战而延迟了向TP的过渡。我们调查如果所有预防感染的措施都是必要的,是否可以选择没有任何危险因素的患者进一步进行TR活检。材料和方法:数据是在我们的学术机构于2021年8月至2022年3月期间收集的,并且是在临床实施了最新的欧洲泌尿外科协会关于前列腺活检表现的指南建议之后。根据感染并发症的危险因素进行风险分层,患者接受TP或TR活检。随访询问活检后并发症。使用治疗加权逆概率(IPTW)倾向评分来平衡基线特征。并发症分为感染性和非感染性并发症。结果:共纳入294例患者,其中161例接受TR活检,133例接受TP活检。TP的并发症发生率为2.2%,而TR活检的并发症发生率为5.5%。TP活检的感染并发症发生率仅为0.7%,而TR活检为1.8%。经IPTW校正后,差异有统计学意义(p = 0.01)。结论:我们的研究表明,即使在一个经过精心挑选的感染并发症风险较低的患者队列中,TR活检也比TP活检导致更多的活检后并发症。这一结论应促使泌尿科改用TP活检。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Scandinavian Journal of Urology
Scandinavian Journal of Urology UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY-
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
6.70%
发文量
70
期刊介绍: Scandinavian Journal of Urology is a journal for the clinical urologist and publishes papers within all fields in clinical urology. Experimental papers related to clinical questions are also invited.Important reports with great news value are published promptly.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信