Infectious complications after transrectal MRI-targeted and systematic prostate biopsy.

PURPOSE: To compare infectious complications after transrectal systematic prostate biopsy (SB) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-targeted biopsy (TB) in a large retrospective cohort to assess whether one technique is superior to the other regarding infectious complications. METHODS: A total of 4497 patients underwent 5288 biopsies, 2875 (54%) SB and 2413 (46%) MRI-TB only. On average, 12 SB cores and 3.7 MRI-TB cores were taken per biopsy session during the study period. Infection-related complications within 30 days were compared. The primary endpoint was a positive urine culture. Secondary endpoints were positive blood cultures, urine tests with elevated leukocytes ≥ 100 E6/L and elevated C-reactive protein (CRP) ≥ 100 mg/L. Chi-square test was used to compare the cohorts. RESULTS: Positive urine cultures were found in 77 (2.7%) after SB and in 42 (1.7%) after MRI-TB (p = 0.022). In total, 46 (0.9%) blood culture positive infections were found, 23 (0.9%) occurred after SB and 23 (1.0%) after MRI-TB, (p = 0.848). Urine tests with elevated leukocytes ≥ 100 E6/L were found in 111 (3.9%) after SB and in 61 (2.5%) after MRI-TB (p = 0.006). Elevated CRP ≥ 100 mg/L was found in 122 (4.2%) after SB and in 72 (3.0%) after MRI-TB (p = 0.015). Blood cultures were drawn more often after SB than after MRI-TB, but the difference was not statistically significant. However, urine cultures and CRP were taken more often after SB than MRI-TB. CONCLUSION: Blood culture positive infections were equally rare after SB and MRI-TB. However, all other infectious complications were more common after SB than MRI-TB.

Does Protocol Make a Difference? Comparison of Two Prostate Cancer Active Surveillance Cohorts: A Non-protocol-based Follow-up and a Protocol-based Contemporary Follow-up.

BACKGROUND: Active surveillance (AS) is the preferred option for initial management for low-risk prostate cancer (PC). Although many AS protocols exist, there is little evidence to support one over another. OBJECTIVE: To assess whether there is difference in overall (OS), prostate cancer-specific (CSS), metastasis-free (MFS), or treatment-free (TFS) survival between a strict (Prostate cancer Research International: Active Surveillance [PRIAS]) and a loose (European Randomized study of Screening for Prostate Cancer [ERSPC]) AS protocol. DESIGN SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: This study included two cohorts of men (n = 518) with low-risk, localized, Gleason score ≤7 PC. The ERSPC cohort included 241 men followed for 9.5 yr (median) with a non-protocol-based follow-up. The PRIAS cohort included 277 men followed for 5 yr (median) with a strict protocol. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: OS, CSS, MFS, and TFS were compared by the Kaplan-Meier method, competing risk analysis, and Cox proportional hazard regression. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: As expected, due to the difference in median follow-up time between the cohorts, a difference in the absolute number of events was seen. However, no difference in any of the survival outcomes was evident in the Kaplan-Meier or competing risks analysis. Furthermore, in Cox proportional hazard regression analysis, cohort (ERSPC vs PRIAS) was not associated with any of the outcomes. Results are limited by the retrospective study design, limited statistical power, and inability to match the cohorts for predictive factors. CONCLUSIONS: There was no difference in survival outcomes between a non-protocol-based follow-up and a protocol-based contemporary AS follow-up of patients with low-risk PC. However, a longer follow-up is needed. PATIENT SUMMARY: We compared survival outcomes of two cohorts of patients with low-risk prostate cancer: a strict and a loose follow-up protocol. We found no differences in survival measures between the cohorts.

Rectal E. coli above ciprofloxacin ECOFF associate with infectious complications following prostate biopsy.

Transrectal prostate biopsies carry the risk of infection. By using non-selective culture plates, instead of commonly used ciprofloxacin (CIP)-containing plates, we analyzed the association between Escherichia coli CIP minimal inhibitory concentration (MIC) and post-biopsy infectious complications. A pre-biopsy rectal swab was taken from 207 consecutive men, scheduled for transrectal 12-core prostate biopsy with CIP 750 mg as the mostly used prophylaxis. CIP MIC of rectal Gram-negative bacilli was determined from a chromogenic agar. Rectal E. coli were categorized to resistant (R) and intermediate (I) isolates together (R + I, MIC > 0.25 mg/l) and to sensitive (S, MIC ≤ 0.25 mg/l) using EUCAST clinical breakpoints. In addition, epidemiological cutoff (ECOFF R, MIC > 0.064 mg/l) was used for categorization. Eighteen (8.7%) men showed CIP R + I E. coli by the EUCAST breakpoints and 41 (19.8%) using the ECOFF R criteria. During follow-up, 15 (7.2%) men had infectious symptoms, of which 9 (4.3%) were culture-confirmed infections. Only 4 (26.7%) of these 15 patients showed R + I E. coli in the rectal swab according to EUCAST, but 10 (66.7%) using the ECOFF cutoff. Rectal E. coli CIP R + I by the EUCAST clinical breakpoints associated with infectious complications with OR 5.7 (95% CI 1.5-21.8, P = 0.005) and ECOFF R E. coli by OR 10.7 (95% CI 3.0-37.6, P < 0.001). Men carrying rectal E. coli with moderately lowered CIP susceptibility (MIC > ECOFF 0.064 mg/l) were identified and, interestingly, they showed a high risk of developing infectious symptoms after the biopsy. This explains why some men develop infectious complications despite appropriate antibiotics before prostatic biopsies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02140502.

Patient Experience of Systematic Versus Fusion Prostate Biopsies.

BACKGROUND: The magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound fusion-guided biopsy (FBx) technique has gained popularity in prostate cancer (PCa) diagnostics, but little is known about its effect on patient experience. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate pain, discomfort and other non-infectious complications in PCa patients undergoing either systematic 12-core transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy (SBx) or FBx and patient willingness to undergo rebiopsy. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A prospective trial of 262 male patients, 203 of whom underwent transrectal SBx and 59 FBx at Helsinki University Hospital in 2015-2016. Patients completed two questionnaires immediately after and at 30 d after biopsy. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSES: Patients reported pain and discomfort on a numeric rating scale (NRS; 0-10) immediately after biopsy. At 30 d, discomfort was measured on a scale ranging from 1 (no inconvenience) to 4 (maximal inconvenience). Other symptoms were reported dichotomously (yes/no) in both questionnaires. Mann-Whitney U, Pearson's χ2, and logistic regression tests were used. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: For the SBx and FBx groups the median number of cores per patient was 12 and three, respectively. At 30 d, a higher proportion of patients in the SBx group had experienced pain than in the FBx group (70/203 [34%] vs 12/59 [20%]; p=0.043), whereas there was no difference in the median discomfort scores. Hematuria was less common in the FBx group (26/59 [44%] vs 140/203 [69%]; p<0.001). Patients willing to undergo rebiopsy immediately post-biopsy reported lower median NRS (3.0 [interquartile range 2.0-5.0] vs 5.0 [4.3-6.0]; p<0.001) and discomfort scores (4.0 [2.0-6.0] vs 7.0 [5.0-8.0]; p<0.001) than those unwilling. At 30 d, less discomfort (2.0 [interquartile range 1.0-2.0] vs 2.0 [2.0-3.0]; p=0.008) and fever (6/195 [3.1%] vs 6/28 [22%]; p=0.001) were experienced by patients willing to undergo rebiopsy. The nonrandomized design was a limitation. CONCLUSIONS: FBx is associated with less pain and hematuria than SBx during the 30-d interval after biopsy. PATIENT SUMMARY: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-targeted prostate biopsy is associated with less pain, discomfort, and blood in the urine compared to the standard ultrasound-guided procedure. Performing MRI-targeted procedures may reduce biopsy-related complications and promote adherence to recommended repeat biopsy for patients on active surveillance for prostate cancer.