Hospital admissions after transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy of the prostate in men diagnosed with prostate cancer: A database analysis in England

International Journal of Urology

Volumn 22, Issue 2, 2015, Pages 181-186

  Anastasiadis, Eleni ^a   van der Meulen, Jan ^a,b   Emberton, Mark ^c,d  

^a ROYAL COLLEGE OF SURGEONS OF ENGLAND   (United Kingdom)

^b LONDON SCHOOL OF HYGIENE AND TROPICAL MEDICINE   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON HOSPITALS   (United Kingdom)

^d UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Biopsy; Diagnosis; Infection; Postoperative complications; Prostatic neoplasms

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGE; AGED; ARTICLE; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER REGISTRY; COMORBIDITY; HEMATURIA; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; IMAGE GUIDED BIOPSY; INFECTIOUS COMPLICATION; INVESTIGATIVE PROCEDURES; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE BIOPSY; PROSTATE CANCER; TRANSRECTAL ULTRASONOGRAPHY; UNITED KINGDOM; URINARY TRACT INFECTION; URINE RETENTION; UROSEPSIS; CANCER STAGING; CLINICAL TRIAL; ENDOSCOPIC ECHOGRAPHY; HOSPITAL ADMISSION; INCIDENCE; MULTICENTER STUDY; NEEDLE BIOPSY; PROCEDURES; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; RECTUM; REGISTER; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; TRENDS; VERY ELDERLY;

AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; BIOPSY, NEEDLE; ENDOSONOGRAPHY; ENGLAND; HUMANS; IMAGE-GUIDED BIOPSY; INCIDENCE; MALE; NEOPLASM STAGING; PATIENT ADMISSION; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; RECTUM; REGISTRIES; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES;

EID: 84922659101     PISSN: 09198172     EISSN: 14422042     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/iju.12634     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Cancer Research UK. Prostate Cancer Key Facts. 2013. [Cited 19 Apr 2013.] Available from URL: http://www.cancerresearchuk.org/cancer-info/cancerstats/keyfacts/prostate-cancer/cancerstats-key-facts-on-prostate-cancer
2. Selley S, Donovan J, Faulkner A, Coast J, Gillatt D. Diagnosis, management and screening of early localised prostate cancer. Health Technol. Assess. 1997; 1: i, 1-96.
3. Rosario DJ, Lane JA, Metcalfe C etal. Short term outcomes of prostate biopsy in men tested for cancer by prostate specific antigen: prospective evaluation within ProtecT study. BMJ 2012; 344: d7894.
4. Loeb S, Carter HB, Berndt SI, Ricker W, Schaeffer EM. Complications after prostate biopsy: data from SEER-Medicare. J. Urol. 2011; 186: 1830-1834.
5. Loeb S, Van den Heuvel S, Zhu X, Bangma CH, Schröder FH, Roobol MJ. Infectious complications and hospital admissions after prostate biopsy in a European randomized trial. Eur. Urol. 2012; 61: 1110-1114.
6. Wagenlehner FME, Van Oostrum E, Tenke P etal. Infective complications after prostate biopsy: outcome of the Global Prevalence Study of Infections in Urology (GPIU) 2010 and 2011, a prospective multinational multicentre prostate biopsy study. Eur. Urol. 2013; 63: 521-527.
7. Carignan A, Roussy J-F, Lapointe V, Valiquette L, Sabbagh R, Pépin J. Increasing risk of infectious complications after transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsies: time to reassess antimicrobial prophylaxis? Eur. Urol. 2012; 62: 453-459.
8. Nam RK, Saskin R, Lee Y etal. Increasing hospital admission rates for urological complications after transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy. J. Urol. 2010; 183: 963-968.
9. Loeb S, Vellekoop A, Ahmed HU etal. Systematic review of complications of prostate biopsy. Eur. Urol. 2013; 64: 876-892.
10. National Cancer Intelligence Network (NCIN). Merged English Cancer Registry Data. 2010. [Cited 3 Aug 2013.] Available from URL: http://www.ncin.org.uk/collecting_and_using_data/national_cancer_data_repository/cancer_registry
11. World Health Organization. ICD-10 Version: 2010. 2010. [Cited 2 Sep 2013.] Available from URL: http://apps.who.int/classifications/icd10/browse/2010/en
12. NHS Connecting for Health. OPCS Classification of Interventions and Procedures Version 4.6 (April 2011) Volume 1 - Tabular List. TSO (The Stationery Office), London, 2011.
13. Health and Social Care Information Centre. Data Linkage and Extract Service. 2013. [Cited 12 Jan 2013.] Available from URL: http://www.hscic.gov.uk/dles
14. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. National Collaborating Centre for Cancer: Prostate Cancer: Diagnosis and Treatment. Cardiff; 2008.
15. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. National Collaborating Centre for Cancer: Prostate Cancer: Diagnosis and Treatment (Updated Guideline). Cardiff; 2014.
16. Nuttall M, Van der Meulen J, Emberton M. Charlson scores based on ICD-10 administrative data were valid in assessing comorbidity in patients undergoing urological cancer surgery. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 2006; 59: 265-273.
17. Patel U, Dasgupta P, Amoroso P, Challacombe B, Pilcher J, Kirby R. Infection after transrectal ultrasonography-guided prostate biopsy: increased relative risks after recent international travel or antibiotic use. BJU Int. 2012; 109: 1781-1785.
18. Kakehi Y, Naito S. Complication rates of ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy: a nation-wide survey in Japan. Int. J. Urol. 2008; 15: 319-321.
19. Loeb S, Van den Heuvel S, Zhu X, Bangma CH, Schroder FH, Roobol MJ. Reply from Authors re: Alexandre R. Zlotta, Robert K. Nam. To Biopsy or Not to Biopsy - Thou Shall Think Twice. Eur Urol 2012; 61: 1115-7 - Considerations for Prostate Biopsy Decisions. Eur. Urol. 2012; 61: 1117-1118.
20. Feliciano J, Teper E, Ferrandino M etal. The incidence of fluoroquinolone resistant infections after prostate biopsy-are fluoroquinolones still effective prophylaxis? J. Urol. 2008; 179: 952-955; discussion 955.
21. ECDC/EMEA Joint Working Group. ECDC/EMEA Joint Technical Report: The Bacterial Challenge: Time to React. Stockholm; 2009.
22. Kumarasamy KK, Toleman MA, Walsh TR etal. Emergence of a new antibiotic resistance mechanism in India, Pakistan, and the UK: a molecular, biological, and epidemiological study. Lancet Infect. Dis. 2010; 10: 597-602.
23. Patel HRH, Lee F, Arya M, Masood S, Palmer JH, Sheriff MK. A national survey of transrectal ultrasound-guided prostatic biopsies: time for a national guideline. Int. J. Clin. Pract. 2003; 57: 773-774.
24. Foster C, Cornford P, Rickards D etal. Towards a Consensus Protocol on Prostate Biopsies: Indications, Techniques and Assessment. Report of a Conference held at the Royal College of Pathologists, London. London; 2006.
25. Zlotta AR, Nam RK. To biopsy or not to biopsy-thou shall think twice. Eur. Urol. 2012; 61: 1115-1117; discussion 1117-18.
26. Naughton CK, Miller DC, Mager DE, Ornstein DK, Catalona WJ. A prospective randomized trial comparing 6 versus 12 prostate biopsy cores: impact on cancer detection. J. Urol. 2000; 164: 388-392.
27. Eichler K, Hempel S, Wilby J, Myers L, Bachmann LM, Kleijnen J. Diagnostic value of systematic biopsy methods in the investigation of prostate cancer: a systematic review. J. Urol. 2006; 175: 1605-1612.
28. Smith R, Coast J. The true cost of antimicrobial resistance. BMJ 2013; 346: f1493.
29. Ukimura O, Coleman JA, De la Taille A etal. Contemporary role of systematic prostate biopsies: indications, techniques, and implications for patient care. Eur. Urol. 2013; 63: 214-230.
30. Grummet JP, Weerakoon M, Huang S etal. Sepsis and "superbugs": should we favour the transperineal over the transrectal approach for prostate biopsy? BJU Int. 2014; 114: 384-388.