Formalin disinfection of prostate biopsy needles may reduce post-biopsy infectious complications.

BACKGROUND: We sought to determine whether formalin disinfection of prostate biopsy needles between cores reduces post-biopsy urinary tract infections (UTIs). METHODS: We reviewed a single-surgeon experience of transrectal prostate biopsies from 2010 to 2014. Biopsies were performed in either an operative suite, where 10% formalin was used to disinfect the needle tip between each biopsy core, or an outpatient clinic, where formalin was not used. Our primary outcome was post-biopsy UTI rates, defined as a positive urine culture within 30 days of biopsy. Infection severity was characterized by the need for admission. Patient demographics, prostate size, prior biopsies, prior UTIs, pre-biopsy antibiotics and cultures and post-biopsy cultures were analyzed. Logistic regression was used to assess predictors of post-biopsy UTIs. Statistical significance was defined as P<0.05. RESULTS: A total of 756 patients were included for analysis, including 253 who received formalin disinfection and 503 who did not. Of these, 32 patients (4.2%) experienced post-biopsy UTIs, with 8 requiring admission (all without formalin use). Infection rates were more than double in the group that did not receive formalin (5.2% vs 2.3%, P=0.085). More patients in the formalin group had undergone prior biopsies (73.9% vs 31.8%, P<0.001). On multivariable analysis, prior UTI (odds ratio (OR) 3.77, P=0.006) was a significant predictor for post-biopsy infection, whereas formalin disinfection trended towards a protective effect (OR 0.41, P=0.055). CONCLUSION: Infectious complications following prostate biopsy may be mitigated by the use of formalin disinfection of the biopsy needle between cores.

Clinical and diagnostic assessment for therapeutic decisions in prostate cancer.

Due to the heterogeneity of prostate cancer (PCa) outcomes, there is a need for individualized treatment plans based on clinical and cancer characteristics. Recent advances in sophisticated imaging modalities have improved the ability to stratify patients according to their risk of PCa diagnosis and progression. This, in turn, has positively influenced the clinical decision making process. However, there is also an overuse of diagnostic imaging in the evaluation of PCa patients. Baseline diagnostic and re-staging evaluations need to be indeed personalized, in order to maximize the results and reduce unnecessary, lengthy and costly procedures. The aim of this review was to critically evaluate current international guidelines in order to identify clinical and diagnostic markers that might help clinicians in the selection of the most appropriate imaging approach. For this aim, different imaging modalities were analyzed in patients with newly diagnosed PCa, focusing on local, nodal and distant staging. Every step of staging was taken into consideration based on patient individualized risk, as defined by routinely available clinical variables. Second, different imaging techniques were also reviewed in the context of relapse after primary treatment, highlighting their utility and impact in the clinical decision making process. This review focuses mainly on conventional established imaging techniques, with an eye also to novel approaches that still need to be validated on large patient series.