Cookies on this website

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Accept all cookies' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. If you click 'Reject all non-essential cookies' only necessary cookies providing core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility will be enabled. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

Objective: To evaluate the prostate cancer (CaP) detection rate and morbidity of performing a transurethral resection biopsy of the prostate (TURBP) at the same time as a saturation biopsy (SBx). Patients: A total of 102 men with previous negative transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) biopsies underwent a SBx under formal anaesthesia. Fifty-four [54 (52.9%)] had a combined SBx and TURBP (Group 1) and 48 (47.1%) had a SBx only (Group 2). Results: The CaP detection rate in Group 1 was 38.9% (21/54), which was significantly higher than the detection rate of 27.1% (13/48) in Group 2 (P = 0.005). CaP was detected via TURBP in 12 patients (22.2%) from Group 1, including 8 (14.8%) patients who had CaP solely in their TURBP chips. According to the D'Amico classification, 66.6% (14/21) of the cancers in Group 1 were intermediate (n = 4) or high risk (n = 10). Of the 8 'TURBP only' cancers, 75% (6/8) were intermediate (n = 2) or high risk (n = 4). Seven of these eight patients went on to have a radical prostatectomy (RP) but only 2 (28.6%) were found to have a pure anterior/transition zone (TZ) tumor. The postoperative urinary retention and emergency admission rates for Groups 1 and 2 were 29.6% (16/54) vs. 16.6% (8/48) (P = 0.095) and 11.1% (6/54) vs. 5.5% (2/48) (n = 0.17). There was no difference in terms of hematuria (P = 0.54), urinary tract infection (UTI) (P = 0.22), or sepsis (P = 0.21), and patients in Group 1 spent an average of 0.5 days longer in hospital (1.9 vs. 1.4; P = 0.008). Conclusions: TURBP in association with SBx increases the detection of clinically important CaP. However, this does have to be balanced against the small increased incidence of urinary retention, emergency re-admission, and longer hospital stay. © 2013 Elsevier Inc.

Original publication

DOI

10.1016/j.urolonc.2011.02.008

Type

Journal article

Journal

Urologic oncology: seminars and original investigations

Publication Date

01/07/2013

Volume

31

Pages

542 - 548