Abstract
For men choosing to screen for prostate cancer (PCa), biopsy remains critical for diagnosis. While transrectal ultrasound-guided (TRUS) biopsy has been the standard of care for many years, recent concerns regarding post-procedural infection have led to increased interest in prostatic sampling via the transperineal (TP) approach. However, TRUS biopsy features important patient-related and physician/practice-related advantages compared to the TP method, and there are several useful strategies to effectively mitigate infectious concerns. The benefits associated with TRUS biopsy, particularly patient comfort and efficient clinical workflow, are further accentuated by several key shortcomings associated with switching to the TP approach. Herein, we present an argument in favor of maintaining TRUS biopsy as standard practice, discussing significant topics including infectious complications, practice workflow and cost, cancer detection rates, and patient experience.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
