MP48-15 EVALUATING THE CLINICAL UTILITY OF TRANSPERINEAL TEMPLATE PROSTATE MAPPING BIOPSY

Abstract

You have accessJournal of UrologyProstate Cancer: Detection and Screening I1 Apr 2015MP48-15 EVALUATING THE CLINICAL UTILITY OF TRANSPERINEAL TEMPLATE PROSTATE MAPPING BIOPSY Yaalini Shanmugabavan, Alex Freeman, Charles Jameson, Massimo Valerio, Mark Emberton, and Hashim Uddin Ahmed Yaalini ShanmugabavanYaalini Shanmugabavan More articles by this author , Alex FreemanAlex Freeman More articles by this author , Charles JamesonCharles Jameson More articles by this author , Massimo ValerioMassimo Valerio More articles by this author , Mark EmbertonMark Emberton More articles by this author , and Hashim Uddin AhmedHashim Uddin Ahmed More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2015.02.1689AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookTwitterLinked InEmail INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES Template biopsies are increasingly used to risk stratify prostate cancer. Our aim was to evaluate the impact on clinical decision-making when using transperineal template prostate mapping (TPM) biopsy following a prior standard trans-rectal ultrasound biopsy. METHODS Our TPM registry database of 699 men had 631 men diagnostic standard TRUS biopsy. The management recommendation after each biopsy result was ascertained from medical records that were recorded prospectively prior to TPM. RESULTS Median age, mean PSA (pre-TPM) and mean PSA (post-TPM) was 63 years (range 40-84), 7.5ng/ml and 8.7ng/ml, respectively. 349/631 (55.3%) transitioned to higher risk cancer, 71/631 (11%) transitioned to lower risk and 211/631 (34%) had no change in risk category following TPM. After TPM, 138/262 (53%) had a change in recommendation from active surveillance to active treatment. 83/309 (27%) had a change in the type of active treatment they were offered and 218/571 (38%) had no change in treatment recommendation made. 31 men, who were offered active treatment or surveillance, were discharged after their TPM due to a ‘no cancer’ diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS TPM biopsies, when compared to TRUS biopsies, carry significant clinical utility by directly impacting on management recommendations made to men with prostate cancer. We found a high rate of transitioning men from surveillance to active treatment recommendations although a significant number were also provided reassurance in following a surveillance approach rather than a radical therapeutic approach. © 2015 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 193Issue 4SApril 2015Page: e599-e600 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2015 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Yaalini Shanmugabavan More articles by this author Alex Freeman More articles by this author Charles Jameson More articles by this author Massimo Valerio More articles by this author Mark Emberton More articles by this author Hashim Uddin Ahmed More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...