Comparing outcomes of transperineal to transrectal prostate biopsies performed under local anaesthesia

Non-infectious adverse events of transperineal prostate biopsies performed under local anaesthesia

OBJECTIVE

To report non-infectious adverse events associated with transperineal prostate biopsy (TPBx) performed under local anaesthesia (LA) in an outpatient setting.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This study reports secondary outcomes from the Norwegian arm of the prospective NORAPP study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT04146142) and included all patients referred for prostate biopsy from November 2019 to February 2021. Transperineal magnetic resonance imaging-transrectal ultrasonography fusion TPBx were taken using 40 mL 1% lidocaine with 4 mL of 8.4% sodium bicarbonate placed in the perineal skin, under the prostatic apex, in the m. levator ani bilaterally, and along the path of the needle. Follow-up using patient-reported questionnaires was done immediately after TPBx, and after 2 weeks and 2 months. Pain was reported using a visual analogue scale (VAS) during placement of the LA, and during and after TPBx. Haematuria and acute urinary retention (AUR) rates were recorded.

RESULTS

We included 402 patients, and the response rate was 99.8% (401/402). The median (interquartile range [IQR]) age was 69 (63-74) years, the prostate volume was 40 (27-58) mL, the prostate-specific antigen level was 7.0 (4.5-11) ng/mL, and the number of biopsy cores taken was 8 (6-10). The median (IQR) VAS pain score was 1 (1-2) during placement of LA, 1 (0-2) during TPBx, and 0 (0-0) after TPBx. Haematuria and AUR rates were 64% (95% confidence interval [CI] 60-69%) and 0.5% (95% CI 0.1-1.8%), respectively. No patients were hospitalised or required after the TPBx surgical intervention.

CONCLUSION

Transperineal prostate biopsies can be performed under LA with limited discomfort to the patient and few post-TPBx adverse events.

Comparing outcomes of transperineal to transrectal prostate biopsies performed under local anaesthesia

Objectives

Patients and methods

Results

Conclusion