Optimization of prostate biopsy: Review of technique and complications

Urologic Clinics of North America

Volumn 41, Issue 2, 2014, Pages 299-313

  Bjurlin, Marc A ^a   Wysock, James S ^a   Taneja, Samir S ^a  

^a NEW YORK UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

Biopsy core number; Magnetic resonance imaging; Prostate needle biopsy; Quinolone reistant infection

Indexed keywords

ANTIBIOTIC AGENT; CEPHALOSPORIN DERIVATIVE; QUINOLINE DERIVED ANTIINFECTIVE AGENT;

ANESTHESIA INDUCTION; ANTIBIOTIC PROPHYLAXIS; ANTIBIOTIC RESISTANCE; BACTEREMIA; BACTERIAL INFECTION; BIOPSY DEVICE; BIOPSY TECHNIQUE; BLOOD TRANSFUSION; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER GRADING; COMPUTER SYSTEM; DIAGNOSTIC APPROACH ROUTE; ERECTILE DYSFUNCTION; GLEASON SCORE; HEMATURIA; HEMOSPERMIA; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; IMAGE GUIDED BIOPSY; IMAGE PROCESSING; INFECTIOUS COMPLICATION; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MECHANICAL PROBE; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PREDICTIVE VALUE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROCESS OPTIMIZATION; PROSTATE BIOPSY; PROSTATE CANCER; PROSTATECTOMY; PROSTATIC INTRAEPITHELIAL NEOPLASIA; QUALITY OF LIFE; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); RECTUM HEMORRHAGE; REVIEW; THREE DIMENSIONAL IMAGING; TRANSPERINEAL SATURATION BIOPSY; TRANSRECTAL ULTRASONOGRAPHY; TREATMENT INDICATION; ULTRASOUND BIOPSY PROBE; URINARY TRACT INFECTION; URINE CULTURE; URINE RETENTION;

BIOPSY CORE NUMBER; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PROSTATE NEEDLE BIOPSY; QUINOLONE-REISTANT INFECTION;

EARLY DETECTION OF CANCER; HUMANS; IMAGE-GUIDED BIOPSY; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MALE; PROSTATE; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS;

EID: 84898040060     PISSN: 00940143     EISSN: 1558318X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ucl.2014.01.011     Document Type: Review

References (132)

1. Taneja SS, Bjurlin MA, Carter HB, et al. White paper: AUA/Optimal techniques of prostate biopsy and specimen handling. 2013. Available at: Accessed May 15, 2013. http://www.auanet.org/common/pdf/education/clinical-guidance/Prostate-Biopsy-WhitePaper.pdf.
2. Bjurlin M.A., Carter H.B., Schellhammer P., et al. Optimization of initial prostate biopsy in clinical practice: sampling, labeling and specimen processing. J Urol 2013, 189:2039-2046.
3. Babaian R.J., Toi A., Kamoi K., et al. A comparative analysis of sextant and an extended 11-core multisite directed biopsy strategy. J Urol 2000, 163:152-157.
4. Guichard G., Larre S., Gallina A., et al. Extended 21-sample needle biopsy protocol for diagnosis of prostate cancer in 1000 consecutive patients. Eur Urol 2007, 52:430-435.
5. de la Taille A., Antiphon P., Salomon L., et al. Prospective evaluation of a 21-sample needle biopsy procedure designed to improve the prostate cancer detection rate. Urology 2003, 61:1181-1186.
6. Eichler K., Hempel S., Wilby J., et al. Diagnostic value of systematic biopsy methods in the investigation of prostate cancer: a systematic review. J Urol 2006, 175:1605-1612.
7. Meng M.V., Franks J.H., Presti J.C., et al. The utility of apical anterior horn biopsies in prostate cancer detection. Urol Oncol 2003, 21:361-365.
8. Moussa A.S., Meshref A., Schoenfield L., et al. Importance of additional "extreme" anterior apical needle biopsies in the initial detection of prostate cancer. Urology 2010, 75:1034-1039.
9. Bazinet M., Karakiewicz P.I., Aprikian A.G., et al. Value of systematic transition zone biopsies in the early detection of prostate cancer. J Urol 1996, 155:605-606.
10. Singh H., Canto E.I., Shariat S.F., et al. Improved detection of clinically significant, curable prostate cancer with systematic 12-core biopsy. J Urol 2004, 171:1089-1092.
11. Meng M.V., Elkin E.P., DuChane J., et al. Impact of increased number of biopsies on the nature of prostate cancer identified. J Urol 2006, 176:63-68.
12. Haas G.P., Delongchamps N.B., Jones R.F., et al. Needle biopsies on autopsy prostates: sensitivity of cancer detection based on true prevalence. J Natl Cancer Inst 2007, 99:1484-1489.
13. Chen M.E., Troncoso P., Johnston D.A., et al. Optimization of prostate biopsy strategy using computer based analysis. J Urol 1997, 158:2168-2175.
14. Levine M.A., Ittman M., Melamed J., et al. Two consecutive sets of transrectal ultrasound guided sextant biopsies of the prostate for the detection of prostate cancer. J Urol 1998, 159:471-475.
15. Lane B.R., Zippe C.D., Abouassaly R., et al. Saturation technique does not decrease cancer detection during followup after initial prostate biopsy. J Urol 2008, 179:1746-1750.
16. Fleshner N.E., Fair W.R. Indications for transition zone biopsy in the detection of prostatic carcinoma. J Urol 1997, 157:556-558.
17. Terris M.K., Pham T.Q., Issa M.M., et al. Routine transition zone and seminal vesicle biopsies in all patients undergoing transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsies are not indicated. J Urol 1997, 157:204-206.
18. Orikasa K., Ito A., Ishidoya S., et al. Anterior apical biopsy: is it useful for prostate cancer detection?. Int J Urol 2008, 15:900-904.
19. Elabbady A.A., Khedr M.M. Extended 12-core prostate biopsy increases both the detection of prostate cancer and the accuracy of Gleason score. Eur Urol 2006, 49:49-53.
20. Mian B.M., Lehr D.J., Moore C.K., et al. Role of prostate biopsy schemes in accurate prediction of Gleason scores. Urology 2006, 67:379-383.
21. San Francisco I.F., DeWolf W.C., Rosen S., et al. Extended prostate needle biopsy improves concordance of Gleason grading between prostate needle biopsy and radical prostatectomy. J Urol 2003, 169:136-140.
22. Kahl P., Wolf S., Adam A., et al. Saturation biopsy improves preoperative Gleason scoring of prostate cancer. Pathol Res Pract 2009, 205:259-264.
23. Rogatsch H., Horninger W., Volgger H., et al. Radical prostatectomy: the value of preoperative, individually labeled apical biopsies. J Urol 2000, 164:754-757.
24. Haarer C.F., Gopalan A., Tickoo S.K., et al. Prostatic transition zone directed needle biopsies uncommonly sample clinically relevant transition zone tumors. J Urol 2009, 182:1337-1341.
25. Singh H., Canto E.I., Shariat S.F., et al. Six additional systematic lateral cores enhance sextant biopsy prediction of pathological features at radical prostatectomy. J Urol 2004, 171:204-209.
26. Ching C.B., Moussa A.S., Li J., et al. Does transrectal ultrasound probe configuration really matter? End fire versus side fire probe prostate cancer detection rates. J Urol 2009, 181:2077-2082. [discussion: 2082-3].
27. Paul R., Korzinek C., Necknig U., et al. Influence of transrectal ultrasound probe on prostate cancer detection in transrectal ultrasound-guided sextant biopsy of prostate. Urology 2004, 64:532-536.
28. Ching C.B., Zaytoun O., Moussa A.S., et al. Type of transrectal ultrasonography probe influences prostate cancer detection rates on repeat prostate biopsy. BJU Int 2012, 110:E46-E49.
29. Rom M., Pycha A., Wiunig C., et al. Prospective randomized multicenter study comparing prostate cancer detection rates of end-fire and side-fire transrectal ultrasound probe configuration. Urology 2012, 80:15-18.
30. Raber M., Scattoni V., Gallina A., et al. Does the transrectal ultrasound probe influence prostate cancer detection in patients undergoing an extended prostate biopsy scheme? Results of a large retrospective study. BJU Int 2012, 109:672-677.
31. Moussa A.S., El-Shafei A., Diaz E., et al. Identification of the variables associated with pain during transrectal ultrasonography-guided prostate biopsy in the era of periprostatic nerve block: the role of transrectal probe configuration. BJU Int 2013, 111(8):1281-1286.
32. Megwalu I.I., Ferguson G.G., Wei J.T., et al. Evaluation of a novel precision template-guided biopsy system for detecting prostate cancer. BJU Int 2008, 102:546-550.
33. Andriole G.L., Bullock T.L., Belani J.S., et al. Is there a better way to biopsy the prostate? Prospects for a novel transrectal systematic biopsy approach. Urology 2007, 70:22-26.
34. Natarajan S., Marks L.S., Margolis D.J., et al. Clinical application of a 3D ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy system. Urol Oncol 2011, 29:334-342.
35. Isebaert S., Van den Bergh L., Haustermans K., et al. Multiparametric MRI for prostate cancer localization in correlation to whole-mount histopathology. J Magn Reson Imaging 2013, 37:1392-1401.
36. Delongchamps N.B., Rouanne M., Flam T., et al. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging for the detection and localization of prostate cancer: combination of T2-weighted, dynamic contrast-enhanced and diffusion-weighted imaging. BJU Int 2011, 107:1411-1418.
37. Sonn G.A., Chang E., Natarajan S., et al. Value of targeted prostate biopsy using magnetic resonance-ultrasound fusion in men with prior negative biopsy and elevated prostate-specific antigen. Eur Urol 2013, [Epub ahead of print].
38. Park B.K., Park J.W., Park S.Y., et al. Prospective evaluation of 3-T MRI performed before initial transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy in patients with high prostate-specific antigen and no previous biopsy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2011, 197:W876-W881.
39. Vargas H.A., Akin O., Afaq A., et al. Magnetic resonance imaging for predicting prostate biopsy findings in patients considered for active surveillance of clinically low risk prostate cancer. J Urol 2012, 188:1732-1738.
40. Margel D., Yap S.A., Lawrentschuk N., et al. Impact of multiparametric endorectal coil prostate magnetic resonance imaging on disease reclassification among active surveillance candidates: a prospective cohort study. J Urol 2012, 187:1247-1252.
41. Barentsz J.O., Richenberg J., Clements R., et al. ESUR prostate MR guidelines 2012. Eur Radiol 2012, 22:746-757.
42. Rosenkrantz A.B., Kim S., Lim R.P., et al. Prostate cancer localization using multiparametric MR imaging: comparison of Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) and Likert Scales. Radiology 2013, 269(2):482-492.
43. Haffner J., Lemaitre L., Puech P., et al. Role of magnetic resonance imaging before initial biopsy: comparison of magnetic resonance imaging-targeted and systematic biopsy for significant prostate cancer detection. BJU Int 2011, 108:E171-E178.
44. Marks L., Young S., Natarajan S. MRI-ultrasound fusion for guidance of targeted prostate biopsy. Curr Opin Urol 2013, 23:43-50.
45. Park B.H., Jeon H.G., Choo S.H., et al. Role of multiparametric 3.0 tesla magnetic resonance imaging in prostate cancer patients eligible for active surveillance. BJU Int 2013, [Epub ahead of print].
46. Stamatakis L., Siddiqui M.M., Nix J.W., et al. Accuracy of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in confirming eligibility for active surveillance for men with prostate cancer. Cancer 2013, 119:3359-3366.
47. Mullins J.K., Bonekamp D., Landis P., et al. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging findings in men with low-risk prostate cancer followed using active surveillance. BJU Int 2013, 111:1037-1045.
48. Lefkowitz G.K., Taneja S.S., Brown J., et al. Followup interval prostate biopsy 3 years after diagnosis of high grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia is associated with high likelihood of prostate cancer, independent of change in prostate specific antigen levels. J Urol 2002, 168:1415-1418.
49. Heidenreich A., Aus G., Bolla M., et al. EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. Eur Urol 2008, 53:68-80.
50. Epstein J.I., Herawi M. Prostate needle biopsies containing prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia or atypical foci suspicious for carcinoma: implications for patient care. J Urol 2006, 175:820-834.
51. Gallo F., Chiono L., Gastaldi E., et al. Prognostic significance of high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (HGPIN): risk of prostatic cancer on repeat biopsies. Urology 2008, 72:628-632.
52. Gokden N., Roehl K.A., Catalona W.J., et al. High-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia in needle biopsy as risk factor for detection of adenocarcinoma: current level of risk in screening population. Urology 2005, 65:538-542.
53. Benecchi L., Pieri A.M., Melissari M., et al. A novel nomogram to predict the probability of prostate cancer on repeat biopsy. J Urol 2008, 180:146-149.
54. Netto G.J., Epstein J.I. Widespread high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia on prostatic needle biopsy: a significant likelihood of subsequently diagnosed adenocarcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol 2006, 30:1184-1188.
55. Godoy G., Huang G.J., Patel T., et al. Long-term follow-up of men with isolated high-grade prostatic intra-epithelial neoplasia followed by serial delayed interval biopsy. Urology 2011, 77:669-674.
56. Merrimen J.L., Jones G., Srigley J.R. Is high grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia still a risk factor for adenocarcinoma in the era of extended biopsy sampling?. Pathology 2010, 42:325-329.
57. Lee M.C., Moussa A.S., Yu C., et al. Multifocal high grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia is a risk factor for subsequent prostate cancer. J Urol 2010, 184:1958-1962.
58. Taneja S.S., Morton R., Barnette G., et al. Prostate cancer diagnosis among men with isolated high-grade intraepithelial neoplasia enrolled onto a 3-year prospective phase III clinical trial of oral toremifene. J Clin Oncol 2013, 31:523-529.
59. Mancuso P.A., Chabert C., Chin P., et al. Prostate cancer detection in men with an initial diagnosis of atypical small acinar proliferation. BJU Int 2007, 99:49-52.
60. Scattoni V., Roscigno M., Freschi M., et al. Predictors of prostate cancer after initial diagnosis of atypical small acinar proliferation at 10 to 12 core biopsies. Urology 2005, 66:1043-1047.
61. Campos-Fernandes J.L., Bastien L., Nicolaiew N., et al. Prostate cancer detection rate in patients with repeated extended 21-sample needle biopsy. Eur Urol 2009, 55:600-606.
62. Zaytoun O.M., Moussa A.S., Gao T., et al. Office based transrectal saturation biopsy improves prostate cancer detection compared to extended biopsy in the repeat biopsy population. J Urol 2011, 186:850-854.
63. Chun F.K., Epstein J.I., Ficarra V., et al. Optimizing performance and interpretation of prostate biopsy: a critical analysis of the literature. Eur Urol 2010, 58:851-864.
64. Allen E.A., Kahane H., Epstein J.I. Repeat biopsy strategies for men with atypical diagnoses on initial prostate needle biopsy. Urology 1998, 52:803-807.
65. Scattoni V., Raber M., Abdollah F., et al. Biopsy schemes with the fewest cores for detecting 95% of the prostate cancers detected by a 24-core biopsy. Eur Urol 2010, 57:1-8.
66. Mabjeesh N.J., Lidawi G., Chen J., et al. High detection rate of significant prostate tumours in anterior zones using transperineal ultrasound-guided template saturation biopsy. BJU Int 2012, 110:993-997.
67. Abdollah F., Novara G., Briganti A., et al. Trans-rectal versus trans-perineal saturation rebiopsy of the prostate: is there a difference in cancer detection rate?. Urology 2011, 77:921-925.
68. Nelson A.W., Harvey R.C., Parker R.A., et al. Repeat prostate biopsy strategies after initial negative biopsy: meta-regression comparing cancer detection of transperineal, transrectal saturation and MRI guided biopsy. PLoS One 2013, 8:e57480.
69. Lynn N.N., Collins G.N., Brown S.C., et al. Periprostatic nerve block gives better analgesia for prostatic biopsy. BJU Int 2002, 90:424-426.
70. Adamakis I., Mitropoulos D., Haritopoulos K., et al. Pain during transrectal ultrasonography guided prostate biopsy: a randomized prospective trial comparing periprostatic infiltration with lidocaine with the intrarectal instillation of lidocaine-prilocaine cream. World J Urol 2004, 22:281-284.
71. Matlaga B.R., Lovato J.F., Hall M.C. Randomized prospective trial of a novel local anesthetic technique for extensive prostate biopsy. Urology 2003, 61:972-976.
72. Autorino R., De Sio M., Di Lorenzo G., et al. How to decrease pain during transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy: a look at the literature. J Urol 2005, 174:2091-2097.
73. Cam K., Sener M., Kayikci A., et al. Combined periprostatic and intraprostatic local anesthesia for prostate biopsy: a double-blind, placebo controlled, randomized trial. J Urol 2008, 180:141-144. [discussion: 144-5].
74. Iremashvili V.V., Chepurov A.K., Kobaladze K.M., et al. Periprostatic local anesthesia with pudendal block for transperineal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy: a randomized trial. Urology 2010, 75:1023-1027.
75. American Urological Association. AUA/SUNA white paper on the incidence, prevention and treatment of complications related to prostate needle biopsy. Available at: Accessed May 21, 2013. http://www.auanet.org/common/pdf/education/clinical-guidance/AUA-SUNA-PNB-White-Paper.pdf.
76. Loeb S., Vellekoop A., Ahmed H.U., et al. Systematic review of complications of prostate biopsy. Eur Urol 2013, 64:876-892.
77. American Urological Association. Best practice policy statement on urologic surgery antimicrobial prophylaxis. 2008. Available at: Accessed May 27, 2013. http://www.auanet.org/content/media/antimicroprop08.pdf.
78. Rosario D.J., Lane J.A., Metcalfe C., et al. Short term outcomes of prostate biopsy in men tested for cancer by prostate specific antigen: prospective evaluation within ProtecT study. BMJ 2012, 344:d7894.
79. Ghani K.R., Dundas D., Patel U. Bleeding after transrectal ultrasonography-guided prostate biopsy: a study of 7-day morbidity after a six-, eight- and 12-core biopsy protocol. BJU Int 2004, 94:1014-1020.
80. Raaijmakers R., Kirkels W.J., Roobol M.J., et al. Complication rates and risk factors of 5802 transrectal ultrasound-guided sextant biopsies of the prostate within a population-based screening program. Urology 2002, 60:826-830.
81. Giannarini G., Mogorovich A., Valent F., et al. Continuing or discontinuing low-dose aspirin before transrectal prostate biopsy: results of a prospective randomized trial. Urology 2007, 70:501-505.
82. Maan Z., Cutting C.W., Patel U., et al. Morbidity of transrectal ultrasonography-guided prostate biopsies in patients after the continued use of low-dose aspirin. BJU Int 2003, 91:798-800.
83. Halliwell O.T., Yadegafar G., Lane C., et al. Transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy of the prostate: aspirin increases the incidence of minor bleeding complications. Clin Radiol 2008, 63:557-561.
84. Chowdhury R., Abbas A., Idriz S., et al. Should warfarin or aspirin be stopped prior to prostate biopsy? An analysis of bleeding complications related to increasing sample number regimes. Clin Radiol 2012, 67:e64-e70.
85. Ihezue C.U., Smart J., Dewbury K.C., et al. Biopsy of the prostate guided by transrectal ultrasound: relation between warfarin use and incidence of bleeding complications. Clin Radiol 2005, 60:459-463. [discussion: 457-8].
86. Shen P.F., Zhu Y.C., Wei W.R., et al. The results of transperineal versus transrectal prostate biopsy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Asian J Androl 2012, 14:310-315.
87. Hara R., Jo Y., Fujii T., et al. Optimal approach for prostate cancer detection as initial biopsy: prospective randomized study comparing transperineal versus transrectal systematic 12-core biopsy. Urology 2008, 71:191-195.
88. Loeb S., Carter H.B., Berndt S.I., et al. Complications after prostate biopsy: data from SEER-Medicare. J Urol 2011, 186:1830-1834.
89. Maatman T.J., Bigham D., Stirling B. Simplified management of post-prostate biopsy rectal bleeding. Urology 2002, 60:508.
90. Dunn I.B., Underwood M.J., Kirk D. Profuse rectal bleeding after prostatic biopsy: a life-threatening complication dealt with simply. BJU Int 2000, 86:910.
91. Smith J.C., Kerr W.S., Athanasoulis C.A., et al. Angiographic management of bleeding secondary to genitourinary tract surgery. J Urol 1975, 113:89-92.
92. Gonen M., Resim S. Simplified treatment of massive rectal bleeding following prostate needle biopsy. Int J Urol 2004, 11:570-572.
93. Pacios E., Esteban J.M., Breton M.L., et al. Endoscopic treatment of massive rectal bleeding following transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy. Scand J Urol Nephrol 2007, 41:561-562.
94. Liss M.A., Chang A., Santos R., et al. Prevalence and significance of fluoroquinolone resistant Escherichia coli in patients undergoing transrectal ultrasound guided prostate needle biopsy. J Urol 2011, 185:1283-1288.
95. Nam R.K., Saskin R., Lee Y., et al. Increasing hospital admission rates for urological complications after transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy. J Urol 2010, 183:963-968.
96. Otrock Z.K., Oghlakian G.O., Salamoun M.M., et al. Incidence of urinary tract infection following transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy at a tertiary-care medical center in Lebanon. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2004, 25:873-877.
97. Zaytoun O.M., Vargo E.H., Rajan R., et al. Emergence of fluoroquinolone-resistant Escherichia coli as cause of postprostate biopsy infection: implications for prophylaxis and treatment. Urology 2011, 77:1035-1041.
98. Williamson D.A., Barrett L.K., Rogers B.A., et al. Infectious complications following transrectal-ultrasound (TRUS) guided prostate biopsy: new challenges in the era of multi-drug resistant Escherichia coli. Clin Infect Dis 2013, 57(2):267-274.
99. Williamson D.A., Roberts S.A., Paterson D.L., et al. Escherichia coli bloodstream infection after transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy: implications of fluoroquinolone-resistant sequence type 131 as a major causative pathogen. Clin Infect Dis 2012, 54:1406-1412.
100. Loeb S., Carter H.B., Berndt S.I., et al. Is repeat prostate biopsy associated with a greater risk of hospitalization? Data from SEER-Medicare. J Urol 2013, 189:867-870.
101. Carey J.M., Korman H.J. Transrectal ultrasound guided biopsy of the prostate. Do enemas decrease clinically significant complications?. J Urol 2001, 166:82-85.
102. Jeon S.S., Woo S.H., Hyun J.H., et al. Bisacodyl rectal preparation can decrease infectious complications of transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy. Urology 2003, 62:461-466.
103. American Urological Association. Best practice policy statement on urologic surgery antimicrobial prophylaxis. 2012. Available at: Accessed June 2, 2013. http://www.auanet.org/content/media/antimicroprop08.pdf.
104. Zani E.L., Clark O.A., Rodrigues Netto N. Antibiotic prophylaxis for transrectal prostate biopsy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2011, (5). CD006576.
105. Carignan A., Roussy J.F., Lapointe V., et al. Increasing risk of infectious complications after transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsies: time to reassess antimicrobial prophylaxis?. Eur Urol 2012, 62:453-459.
106. Steensels D., Slabbaert K., De Wever L., et al. Fluoroquinolone-resistant E. coli in intestinal flora of patients undergoing transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy-should we reassess our practices for antibiotic prophylaxis?. Clin Microbiol Infect 2012, 18:575-581.
107. Taylor A.K., Zembower T.R., Nadler R.B., et al. Targeted antimicrobial prophylaxis using rectal swab cultures in men undergoing transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy is associated with reduced incidence of postoperative infectious complications and cost of care. J Urol 2012, 187:1275-1279.
108. Horcajada J.P., Busto M., Grau S., et al. High prevalence of extended-spectrum beta-lactamase-producing enterobacteriaceae in bacteremia after transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy: a need for changing preventive protocol. Urology 2009, 74:1195-1199.
109. Miller J., Perumalla C., Heap G. Complications of transrectal versus transperineal prostate biopsy. ANZ J Surg 2005, 75:48-50.
110. Tumbarello M., Trecarichi E.M., Bassetti M., et al. Identifying patients harboring extended-spectrum-beta-lactamase-producing Enterobacteriaceae on hospital admission: derivation and validation of a scoring system. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2011, 55:3485-3490.
111. Klein T., Palisaar R.J., Holz A., et al. The impact of prostate biopsy and periprostatic nerve block on erectile and voiding function: a prospective study. J Urol 2010, 184:1447-1452.
112. Akyol I., Adayener C. Transient impotence after transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy. J Clin Ultrasound 2008, 36:33-34.
113. Helfand B.T., Glaser A.P., Rimar K., et al. Prostate cancer diagnosis is associated with an increased risk of erectile dysfunction after prostate biopsy. BJU Int 2013, 111:38-43.
114. Fujita K., Landis P., McNeil B.K., et al. Serial prostate biopsies are associated with an increased risk of erectile dysfunction in men with prostate cancer on active surveillance. J Urol 2009, 182:2664-2669.
115. Akbal C., Turker P., Tavukcu H.H., et al. Erectile function in prostate cancer-free patients who underwent prostate saturation biopsy. Eur Urol 2008, 53:540-544.
116. Chrisofos M., Papatsoris A.G., Dellis A., et al. Can prostate biopsies affect erectile function?. Andrologia 2006, 38:79-83.
117. Berger A.P., Gozzi C., Steiner H., et al. Complication rate of transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy: a comparison among 3 protocols with 6, 10 and 15 cores. J Urol 2004, 171:1478-1480. [discussion: 1480-1].
118. Zaytoun O.M., Anil T., Moussa A.S., et al. Morbidity of prostate biopsy after simplified versus complex preparation protocols: assessment of risk factors. Urology 2011, 77:910-914.
119. Challacombe B., Dasgupta P., Patel U., et al. Recognizing and managing the complications of prostate biopsy. BJU Int 2011, 108:1233-1234.
120. Pepe P., Aragona F. Morbidity after transperineal prostate biopsy in 3000 patients undergoing 12 vs 18 vs more than 24 needle cores. Urology 2013, 81:1142-1146.
121. Djavan B., Waldert M., Zlotta A., et al. Safety and morbidity of first and repeat transrectal ultrasound guided prostate needle biopsies: results of a prospective European prostate cancer detection study. J Urol 2001, 166:856-860.
122. Rodriguez L.V., Terris M.K. Risks and complications of transrectal ultrasound guided prostate needle biopsy: a prospective study and review of the literature. J Urol 1998, 160:2115-2120.
123. Eskew L.A., Bare R.L., McCullough D.L. Systematic 5 region prostate biopsy is superior to sextant method for diagnosing carcinoma of the prostate. J Urol 1997, 157:199-202. [discussion: 202-3].
124. Naughton C.K., Miller D.C., Mager D.E., et al. A prospective randomized trial comparing 6 versus 12 prostate biopsy cores: impact on cancer detection. J Urol 2000, 164:388-392.
125. Presti J.C., Chang J.J., Bhargava V., et al. The optimal systematic prostate biopsy scheme should include 8 rather than 6 biopsies: results of a prospective clinical trial. J Urol 2000, 163:163-166.
126. Gore J.L., Shariat S.F., Miles B.J., et al. Optimal combinations of systematic sextant and laterally directed biopsies for the detection of prostate cancer. J Urol 2001, 165:1554-1559.
127. Philip J., Ragavan N., Desouza J., et al. Effect of peripheral biopsies in maximising early prostate cancer detection in 8-, 10- or 12-core biopsy regimens. BJU Int 2004, 93:1218-1220.
128. Shim H.B., Park H.K., Lee S.E., et al. Optimal site and number of biopsy cores according to prostate volume prostate cancer detection in Korea. Urology 2007, 69:902-906.
129. Scattoni V., Roscigno M., Raber M., et al. Initial extended transrectal prostate biopsy-are more prostate cancers detected with 18 cores than with 12 cores?. J Urol 2008, 179:1327-1331.
130. Pepe P., Aragona F. Saturation prostate needle biopsy and prostate cancer detection at initial and repeat evaluation. Urology 2007, 70:1131-1135.
131. Jones J.S., Patel A., Schoenfield L., et al. Saturation technique does not improve cancer detection as an initial prostate biopsy strategy. J Urol 2006, 175:485-488.
132. Ploussard G., Nicolaiew N., Marchand C., et al. Prospective evaluation of an extended 21-core biopsy scheme as initial prostate cancer diagnostic strategy. Eur Urol 2012, 65(1):154-161.