Transperineal Prostate Biopsy Research Articles

A novel simplified transperineal prostate biopsy guided by perineal ultrasound.

Prostate biopsies are mainly performed through transrectal or perineal approaches, while ultrasound probes are located in rectum for guidance. However, reports on the use of perineal ultrasound guided transperineal prostate biopsy (PG-TPPB) are few. A retrospective case-control study was designed. A total of 111 patients who underwent PG-TPPB from February 2019 to December 2020 were investigated retrospectively. Simultaneously, 188 patients who underwent transrectal prostate biopsy (TRPB) were included as control. The prostate cancer detection rates (PCDR), complication rates, and application values were compared between the two groups. The overall PCDR in the PG-TPPB and TRPB groups were 33.3% (37/111) and 39.9% (75/188), respectively (P = 0.258). There was no significant difference in the PCDR between the two groups under each PSA level (all P > 0.05). The single-needle PCDR in the PG-TPPB and TRPB groups were 21.5%（277/1 287）and 24.0% (513/2 134), respectively (P = 0.091). The incidence of complications in the PG-TPPB group was significantly lower than that in the TRPB group (8.1% vs 21.3%, P = 0.003). The PCDRs of PG-TPPB and TRPB were the same. However, the postoperative complication rate of PG-TPPB was significantly lower than that of TRPB. Moreover, PG-TPPB required simpler equipment and did not require enema administration, which is suitable for patients with rectal contraindications. The reports on perineal ultrasound guided transperineal prostate biopsy (PG-TPPB) are few. Our study indicated PG-TPPB reduced the postoperative complication rate. Moreover, PG-TPPB required simpler equipment. Importantly, PG-TPPB is suitable for patients with rectal contraindications.

Reply: Complications Following Transrectal and Transperineal Prostate Biopsy: Results of the ProBE-PC Randomized Clinical Trial.

Reply: Complications Following Transrectal and Transperineal Prostate Biopsy: Results of the ProBE-PC Randomized Clinical Trial.

Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer Detection Following Transrectal and Transperineal Biopsy: Results of the Prostate Biopsy Efficacy and Complications Randomized Clinical Trial.

The comparative effectiveness of transrectal and transperineal prostate biopsy in detecting clinically significant prostate cancer is not well understood. We conducted a randomized clinical trial to determine whether transperineal biopsy improves the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer. Of the 840 men randomized, 93% were White, 44% had a previous biopsy, with a median age of 66 years and median PSA density of 0.14. Of these, 384 underwent transrectal and 398 underwent transperineal prostate biopsy. Prebiopsy prostate MRI was performed in 96% of men. Grade Group ≥ 2 prostate cancer was classified as clinically significant. Odds ratios were calculated using logistic regression to evaluate the effect of biopsy procedures on cancer detection rates. The detection rates of clinically significant prostate cancer were 47.1% and 43.2% (odds ratio 1.17; 95% CI, 0.88-1.55) for transrectal and transperineal biopsy, respectively. Age, PSA density, clinical stage and Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System score were associated with the diagnosis of clinically significant cancer, whereas history of previous biopsy, anterior tumors, and biopsy procedure (transrectal or transperineal) were not. Clinically significant cancer detection rates in biopsy-naïve men undergoing MRI-targeted transrectal or transperineal biopsy were 59% and 62%, respectively. The overall cancer detection rates following transrectal and transperineal biopsy were 72.1% and 70.4%, respectively. There was no significant difference noted in the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer following transrectal or transperineal prostate biopsy. Urologists may utilize either biopsy procedure that best suits their patients' needs and practice setting.

Patient tolerance and complication rates of transperineal prostate biopsy with coaxial technique under local anesthesia: initial experience of a single institution.

Due to infectious complications of transrectal prostate biopsy (TRBx), the transperineal prostate biopsy (TPBx) technique is gaining popularity and is the first-line method in many institutions. We share our experience of the first 100 patients with TPBx, performed using the coaxial needle technique under local anesthesia. We retrospectively reviewed the records of the first 100 patients who had undergone TPBx between December 2022 and September 2023. Complication rates, cancer detection rates, patient tolerance, and pain response to the TPBx under local anesthesia at different steps of the procedure were collected. The mean age, total prostate-specific antigen (PSA), prostate volume, and PSA density were 64.5±7.5 years, 8.82±12 ng/mL, 58.4±26.4 mL, and 0.17±0.18 ng/mL2. Prostate cancer (PCa) was detected at histopathological evaluation in 51 patients. The mean positive core number and percentage of cancer involvement per core in patients who have PCa were 5.4±3.2 and 68.5±29.1, respectively. The mean pain score during the entire procedure was 2.85±1.48. When the steps are evaluated separately, the mean pain score during the probe placement step, local anesthetic, and sampling steps were 3.35±1.65, 2.54±1.45, and 0.9±0.82, respectively. Transperineal prostate biopsy with coaxial needle technique under local anesthesia is a well-tolerated procedure with feasible complication rates and patient discomfort.

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

To report non-infectious adverse events associated with transperineal prostate biopsy (TPBx) performed under local anaesthesia (LA) in an outpatient setting. 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. 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. Transperineal prostate biopsies can be performed under LA with limited discomfort to the patient and few post-TPBx adverse events.

Transrectal versus transperineal prostate biopsy for cancer detection in patients with gray-zone prostate-specific antigen: a multicenter, real-world study.

Knowledge about the effect of different prostate biopsy approaches on the prostate cancer detection rate (CDR) in patients with gray-zone prostate-specific antigen (PSA) is limited. We performed this study to compare the CDR among patients who underwent different biopsy approaches and had rising PSA levels in the gray zone. Two hundred and twenty-two patients who underwent transrectal prostate biopsy (TRB) and 216 patients who underwent transperineal prostate biopsy (TPB) between June 2016 and September 2022 were reviewed in this study. In addition, 110 patients who received additional targeted biopsies following the systematic TPB were identified. Clinical parameters, including age, PSA derivative, prostate volume (PV), and needle core count, were recorded. The data were fitted via propensity score matching (PSM), adjusting for potential confounders. TPB outperformed TRB in terms of the CDR (49.6% vs 28.3%, P = 0.001). The clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) detection rate was not significantly different between TPB and TRB (78.6% vs 68.8%, P = 0.306). In stratified analysis, TPB outperformed TRB in CDR when the age of patients was 65-75 years (59.0% vs 22.0%, P < 0.001), when PV was 25.00-50.00 ml (63.2% vs 28.3%, P < 0.001), and when needle core count was no more than 12 (58.5% vs 31.5%, P = 0.005). The CDR (P = 0.712) and detection rate of csPCa (P = 0.993) did not significantly differ among the systematic, targeted, and combined biopsies. TPB outperformed TRB in CDR for patients with gray-zone PSA. Moreover, performing target biopsy after systematic TPB provided no additional benefits in CDR.

Diagnostic Utility of Artificial Intelligence–assisted Transperineal Biopsy Planning in Prostate Cancer Suspected Men: A Prospective Cohort Study

Background and objectiveAccurate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) reporting is essential for transperineal prostate biopsy (TPB) planning. Although approved computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) tools may assist urologists in this task, evidence of improved clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) detection is lacking. Therefore, we aimed to document the diagnostic utility of using Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) and CAD for biopsy planning compared with PI-RADS alone. MethodsA total of 262 consecutive men scheduled for TPB at our referral centre were analysed. Reported PI-RADS lesions and an US Food and Drug Administration–cleared CAD tool were used for TPB planning. PI-RADS and CAD lesions were targeted on TPB, while four (interquartile range: 2–5) systematic biopsies were taken. The outcomes were the (1) proportion of csPCa (grade group ≥2) and (2) number of targeted lesions and false-positive rate. Performance was tested using free-response receiver operating characteristic curves and the exact Fisher-Yates test. Key findings and limitationsOverall, csPCa was detected in 56% (146/262) of men, with sensitivity of 92% and 97% (p = 0.007) for PI-RADS– and CAD-directed TPB, respectively. In 4% (10/262), csPCa was detected solely by CAD-directed biopsies; in 8% (22/262), additional csPCa lesions were detected. However, the number of targeted lesions increased by 54% (518 vs 336) and the false-positive rate doubled (0.66 vs1.39; p = 0.009). Limitations include biopsies only for men at clinical/radiological suspicion and no multidisciplinary review of MRI before biopsy. Conclusions and clinical implicationsThe tested CAD tool for TPB planning improves csPCa detection at the cost of an increased number of lesions sampled and false positives. This may enable more personalised biopsy planning depending on urological and patient preferences. Patient summaryThe computer-aided diagnosis tool tested for transperineal prostate biopsy planning improves the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer at the cost of an increased number of lesions sampled and false positives. This may enable more personalised biopsy planning depending on urological and patient preferences.

Current Perceptions, Practice Patterns, and Barriers to Adoption of Transperineal Prostate Biopsy under local anesthesia

ObjectivesTo assess perceptions, practice patterns, and barriers to adoption of Transperineal prostate biopsy (TPBx) under local anesthesia. MethodsProviders from Michigan Urological Surgery Improvement Collaborative (MUSIC) and Pennsylvania Urologic Regional Collaborative (PURC) were administered an online survey to assess beliefs and educational needs regarding TPBx. Providers were divided into those who performed or did not perform TPBx. The MUSIC and PURC registry were queried to assess TPBx utilization. Descriptive analytics and bivariate analysis determined associations between provider/practice demographics and attitudes. ResultsSince 2019, TPBx adoption has increased more than 2-fold to 7.0% and 16% across MUSIC and PURC practices, respectively. Of 350 urologists invited to participate in a survey, a total of 91 complete responses were obtained with 21 respondents (23%) reported performing TPBx. Participants estimated the learning curve was <10 procedure for TPBx performers and non-performers. No significant association was observed between learning curve and provider age/practice setting. The major perceived benefits of TPBx were decreased risk of sepsis, improved cancer detection rate and antibiotic stewardship. The most commonly cited challenges to implementation included access to equipment and patient experience. Urologists performing TPBx reported learning curve as an additional barrier, while those not performing TPBx reported duration of procedure. ConclusionsAccess to equipment and patient experience concerns remain substantial barriers to adoption of TPBx. Dissemination of techniques utilizing existing equipment and optimization of local anesthetic protocols for TPBx may help facilitate the continued adoption of TPBx.

Are systematic prostate biopsy still necessary in biopsy naive men?

Multiparametric MRI and the transperineal approach have become standard in the diagnostic pathway for suspected prostate cancer. Targeting of MRI lesions is performed at most centers, but the routine use of systematic cores is controversial. We aim to assess the value of obtaining systematic cores in patients undergoing cognitive fusion targeted double-freehand transperineal prostate biopsy. Patients who underwent a cognitive fusion, freehand TPB at a single tertiary urology service (Perth, Australia) between November 2020 and November 2021 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were included if they were biopsy naive and had a clinical suspicion of prostate cancer, based on their mpMRI results. Both targeted and systematic cores were taken at the time of their biopsy. One hundred forty patients suited the selection criteria. Clinically significant cancer was identified in 63% of patients. Of those that had clinically significant cancer, the target lesion identified 91% of the disease, missing 9% of patients whom the target biopsy detected non-clinically significant cancer but was identified in the systematic cores. Higher PI-RADS category patients were also found to be associated with an increasing likelihood of identifying clinically significant cancer within the target. In patients with PI-RADS 3 and higher, the target biopsy can miss up to 9% of clinically significant cancer. Systematic cores can add value as they can also change management by identifying a high-risk disease where only intermediate cancer was identified in the target. A combination of targeted and systematic cores is still required to detect cancer.

The learning curve and experience of a novel multi-modal image fusion targeted transperineal prostate biopsy technique using electromagnetic needle tracking under local anesthesia.

Prostate cancer is the most common malignant tumor of male genitourinary system, and the gold standard for its diagnosis is prostate biopsy. Focusing on the methods and skills of prostate biopsy, we explored the learning curve and experience of a novel magnetic resonance imaging and transrectal ultrasound (mpMRI-TRUS) image fusion transperineal biopsy (TPB) technique using electromagnetic needle tracking under local anesthesia. The clinical and pathological data of 92 patients who underwent targeted TPB from January 2023 to July 2023 in our center were prospectively collected. The cumulative sum (CUSUM) analysis method and the best fitting curve were used to analyze the learning curve of this novel technique, and the clinical characteristics, perioperative data and tumor positive rate of prostate biopsy of patients at different stages of the learning curve were compared. With the increase of the number of surgical cases, the overall operative time showed a downward trend. The best fitting curve of CUSUM reached its peak at the twelfth case, which is the minimum cumulative number of surgical cases needed to cross the learning curve of the operation. Taking this as the boundary, the learning curve is divided into two stages: learning improvement stage (group A, 12 cases) and proficiency stage (group B, 80 cases). The surgical time and visual analog scale score during prostate biopsy in group A were significantly higher than those in group B. The visual numerical scale score during prostate biopsy in group A was significantly lower than that in group B. There was no statistically significant difference between group A and group B in the detection rate of csPCa and the incidence of perioperative complications. The novel targeted TPB technique is divided into learning improvement stage and proficiency stage, and 12 cases may be the least cumulative number.

A Comparison between Kinematic Models for Robotic Needle Insertion with Application into Transperineal Prostate Biopsy

Transperineal prostate biopsy is the most reliable technique for detecting prostate cancer, and robot-assisted needle insertion has the potential to improve the accuracy of this procedure. Modeling the interaction between a bevel-tip needle and the tissue, considering tissue heterogeneity, needle bending, and tissue/organ deformation and movement is a required step to enable robotic needle insertion. Even if several models exist, they have never been compared on experimental grounds. Based on this motivation, this paper proposes an experimental comparison for kinematic models of needle insertion, considering different needle insertion speeds and different degrees of tissue stiffness. The experimental comparison considers automated insertions of needles into transparent silicone phantoms under stereo-image guidance. The comparison evaluates the accuracy of existing models in predicting needle deformation.

Evaluating the Effectiveness and Safety of Robotic-Assisted MRI/TRUS Fusion Transperineal Prostate Biopsy Systems: A Narrative Review Based on Current Literature

Evaluating the Effectiveness and Safety of Robotic-Assisted MRI/TRUS Fusion Transperineal Prostate Biopsy Systems: A Narrative Review Based on Current Literature

Evaluating Transperineal Prostate Biopsies Performed by a New Operator: A Prospective Clinical Audit at Dorset County Hospital.

Introduction The transperineal (TP) approach for prostate biopsy offers advantages such as a low risk of infection, the ability to target lesions in difficult locations, and a rapid acquisition of proficiency. This prospective clinical audit aims to evaluate the outcomes and patient experiences of TP prostate biopsies performed by a new operator to determine the feasibility of adopting the TP biopsy as the primary method for prostate evaluations. Methods The study included all patients who underwent a TP prostate biopsy from August 1 to September 30, 2022, at Dorset County Hospital National Health Service Foundation Trust. The operator, a member of the urology team, had recently begun performing these biopsies independently after completing a four-month supervised training program and receiving approval from two consulting trainers. The biopsy technique was evaluated based on diagnostic yield and patient experience, comparing pre-procedure imaging results with histology reports and analyzing patient-completed questionnaires. Results Among the 42 patients, the cancer detection rate was 79%. The highest core positivity rate was 100% in two patients (5%), with 90% in 11 patients (26%). Of the patients, 57% showed complete agreement between magnetic resonance imaging findings and histology. A questionnaire assessing patient experience received a 64% response rate. The most common pain score reported was 2 (on a scale of 0-10), noted in 25% of patients. Most reported mild lower urinary tract symptoms (88%) and mild hematuria (85%). Of the patients, 44% rated their overall satisfaction as 10 (on a scale of 0-10), and no urinary tract infections were reported. Conclusion The findings support the adoption of TP biopsy as the primary method for prostate biopsies due to its short learning curve, high diagnostic yield, and favorable patient satisfaction. Training for new operators should be encouraged to achieve this goal.

Ductal prostate cancer staging: Role of PSMA PET/CT.

To evaluate the accuracy of PSMA PET/CT in the diagnosis and clinical staging of prostatic ductal adenocarcinoma (DAC). Two Caucasian men 58 and 62 years old were admitted to our Department for dysuria: the patients had not familiarity for prostate cancer (PCa), PSA values were 5.6 and 2.8 ng/ml, digital rectal examination was positive, multiparametric magnetic resonance image (mpMRI) showed for both the presence of an index lesion PIRADS score 5. The patients underwent extended transperineal prostate biopsy combined with four mpMRI/TRUS fusion biopsy under sedation and antibiotic prophylaxis; biopsy histology demonstrated the presence of a mixed PCa characterized by DAC and acinar PCa (Grade Group 4/Gleason score 8). The patients underwent clinical staging performing lung and abdominal CT, bone scan and fluoride 18 (18F) PSMA PET/CT. Conventional imaging was negative for distant metastases; 18F-PSMA PET/CT showed in both patients an intraprostatic lesion characterized by a standardized uptake value (SUVmax) equal to 4.6 and 4.9 in the absence of distant lesions suspicious for metastases. Following multidisciplinary evaluation, the patients underwent radical prostatectomy plus extended pelvic lymphadenectomy. Definitive specimen showed the presence in both cases of a mixed pT3bN1 PCa (ductal plus acinar pattern Grade Group 4) with positive surgical margins, neuronal invasion, and nodes metastases (5/20 and 6/24, respectively). Post-operative PSA in the two patients was 0.8 and 0.3 ng/ml, therefore patients underwent adjuvant therapy. Conventional imaging and PSMA PET/CT could result inadequate in clinical staging of DAC, the use of more imaging data (i.e. mpMRI and/or F-18 FDG) could improve overall accuracy.

Reply: Complications Following Transrectal and Transperineal Prostate Biopsy: Results of the ProBE-PC Randomized Clinical Trial.

Reply: Complications Following Transrectal and Transperineal Prostate Biopsy: Results of the ProBE-PC Randomized Clinical Trial.

Evaluating the Role of Ultrasound in Prostate Cancer trial – phase 1: Early experience of micro-ultrasound in the United Kingdom

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate if the use of micro-ultrasound can detect clinically significant prostate pathology when compared to histology obtained during a transperineal prostate biopsy. Methods: Patients suspected of having prostate cancer, who had a pre-biopsy magnetic resonance imaging and could tolerate a transrectal examination, were prospectively recruited. All patients had a micro-ultrasound scan prior to their biopsy. The findings of magnetic resonance imaging, micro-ultrasound and histology were risk stratified in accordance with local pathways. Comparison of assigned risk scores was made using histology as the reference standard. Results: Data from 101 patients were evaluated. Histology showed that clinically significant prostate cancer was detected in 48.5% ( n = 49/101) of patients. Moderate inter-rater agreement was found in both magnetic resonance imaging and micro-ultrasound with К of 0.31 in both modalities. High-risk findings were identified in 81% ( n = 82/101) patients at magnetic resonance imaging and in 66% ( n = 67/101) patients at micro-ultrasound. Sensitivity and specificity of magnetic resonance imaging were found to be 87% and 34.6% and for micro-ultrasound 73.3% and 53.8%, respectively. Conclusion: A limitation of this study was that the biopsy was not performed with micro-ultrasound which may have resulted in unidentified cancers and lowered the apparent accuracy of the technique. However, we conclude that while micro-ultrasound was diagnostic, magnetic resonance imaging demonstrated higher sensitivity in our local population and remains the pre-biopsy imaging modality of choice. However, the higher specificity of micro-ultrasound identified does indicate that it may be of value when magnetic resonance imaging is contraindicated. The role of micro-ultrasound, within an active surveillance pathway for prostate cancer, warrants further investigation.

The effectiveness of mapping-targeted biopsies on the index lesion in transperineal prostate biopsies.

To evaluate the effectiveness of mapping-targeted biopsies (MTB) on the index lesion for the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) in transperineal fusion-image prostate biopsies. A retrospective analysis was conducted on 309 men with suspected PCa who underwent prostate biopsies at the Creu Blanca reference center in Barcelona, Spain. The Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS v.2.1) of the magnetic resonance images (MRI) were reclassified by an expert radiologist reading of pre-biopsy biparametric MRI used for segmentation of suspected lesions. Transperineal MTB of suspicious lesions and 12-core systematic biopsies were performed using the Artemis™ platform. CsPCa was defined as International Society of Urological Pathology grade group ≥ 2. CsPCa was detected in 192 men (62.1%), with detection rates of 6.3% for PI-RADS 2, 26.8% for PI-RADS 3, 87.3% for PI-RADS 4, and 93.1% for PI-RADS 5. MTB of the index lesion identified 185 csPCa (96.3%). CsPCa was detected solely in systematic biopsies in three cases (1.6%), while an additional four cases (2.1%) were identified only in the second suspected lesion. A predictive model for csPCa detection in MTB of the index lesion was developed, with an AUC of 0.918 (95% CI 0.887-0.950). This model had the potential to avoid 23.3% of prostate biopsies without missing additional csPCa cases. MTB of the index lesion was highly effective for identifying csPCa in fusion transperineal prostate biopsies. A developed predictive model successfully reduced the need for almost one quarter of biopsies without missing csPCa cases.

Antibiotic prophylaxis in urologic interventions: Who, when, where?

Periprocedural prophylaxis in medicine encompasses the set of measures (physical, chemical, and pharmacological) used to reduce the risk of infection. Antibiotic prophylaxis (AP) refers to the administration of a short-term regimen of antibiotics shortly before a medical procedure to reduce the risk of infectious complications that can result from diagnostic and therapeutic interventions. The outspreading growth of multidrug-resistant bacterial species and changes in the bacterial local ecosystem have impeded the development of a unique scheme of AP in urology. To review the literature and current guidelines regarding AP for urological diagnostic and therapeutic procedures, and to define agents, timing, and occasions when administering pharmacological prophylaxis. Secondly, according to current literature, to open new scenarios where AP can be useful or useless. Major gaps in evidence still exist in this field. AP appears useful in many invasive procedures and some sub-populations at risk of infectious complications. AP is not routinely recommended for urodynamic exams, diagnostic cystoscopy, and extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy. The available data regarding the use of AP during the transperineal prostate biopsy are still unclear; conversely, in the case of the transrectal approach AP is mandatory. AP is still considered the gold standard for the prevention of postoperative infective complications in the case of ureteroscopy, percutaneous nephrolithotomy, endoscopic resection of bladder tumor, endoscopic resection of the prostate, and prosthetic or major surgery. The review highlights the complexity of determining the appropriate candidates for AP, emphasizing the importance of considering patient-specific factors such as comorbidities, immunocompetence, and the nature of the urologic intervention. The evidence suggests that a one-size-fits-all approach may not be suitable, and a tailored strategy based on the specific procedure and patient characteristics is essential.

Targeted augmented reality-guided transperineal prostate biopsies study: initial experience.

Transperineal biopsy of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-detected prostate lesions is now the established technique used in prostate cancer (CaP) diagnostics. Virtual Surgery Intelligence (VSI) Holomedicine by Apoqlar (Hamburg, Germany) is a mixed reality (MR)/augmented reality (AR) software platform that runs on the HoloLens II system (Microsoft, Redford, USA). Multiparametric prostate MRI images were converted into 3D holograms and added into a MR space, enabling visualization of a 3D hologram and image-assisted prostate biopsy. The Targeted Augmented Reality-GuidEd Transperineal (TARGET) study investigated the feasibility of performing AR-guided prostate biopsies in a MR framework, using the VSI platform in patients with MRI-detected prostate lesions. Ten patients with a clinical suspicion of CaP on MRI (Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System, PI-RADS 4/5) were uploaded to the VSI HoloLens system. Two MR/AR-guided prostate biopsies were then acquired using the PrecisionPoint Freehand transperineal biopsy system. Cognitive fusion biopsies were performed as standard of care following the MR/AR-guided prostate biopsies. All 10 patients successfully underwent MR/AR-guided prostate biopsy after 3D MR images were overlaid on the patient's body. Prostatic tissue was obtained in all MR/AR-guided specimens. Seven patients (70%) had matching histology in both the standard and MR/AR-guided biopsies. The remaining three had ISUP (International Society of Urological Pathology) Grade 2 CaP. There were no immediate complications. We believe this is a world first. The initial feasibility data from the TARGET study demonstrated that an MR/AR-guided prostate biopsy utilizing the VSI Holomedicine system is a viable option in CaP diagnostics. The next stage in development is to combine AR images with real-time needle insertion and to provide further data to formally appraise the sensitivity and specificity of the technique.

Office-based Magnetic Resonance Imaging–guided Transperineal Prostate Biopsy Without Antibiotic Prophylaxis: A Real-world Clinical Utility Study

Background and objectiveAdvances in for magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-guided transperineal biopsy (TPBx) techniques have facilitated outpatient prostate biopsies under local anaesthesia to lower postbiopsy infection rates. However, there is debate regarding antibiotic prophylaxis because of concerns regarding antibiotic resistance and interactions. Our objective was to assess the transition from office-based transrectal biopsy to TPBx performed under local anaesthesia without antibiotic prophylaxis despite potential risk factors for infectious complications. MethodsWe conducted a prospective assessment of 665 men undergoing office-based MRI-guided TPBx. The primary outcome was the rate of urosepsis or febrile urinary tract infections requiring hospitalisation and/or antibiotics within 2 wk after biopsy. Secondary outcomes included patient-reported procedure tolerability and the prostate cancer detection rate. Key findings and limitationsTPBx using a median of nine cores per patient (range 4–15) detected prostate cancer in 534/665 men (80%). Only four men (0.6%) were hospitalised for suspected postbiopsy infection; no patient experienced urosepsis. The TPBx procedure was well tolerated, with low pain scores (median Visual Analogue Scale score of 2, interquartile range [IQR] 1–3) and positive patient ratings (median rating 1 [no problem], IQR 1–2). Limitations include the single-centre analysis and lack of randomisation for antibiotic prophylaxis. Conclusions and clinical implicationsAn office-based TPBx strategy under local anaesthesia without antibiotic prophylaxis is well tolerated and has a very low risk of side effects. This approach should be considered as the standard of care. Further studies may determine if a subgroup of predisposed men could benefit from antibiotic prophylaxis. Patient summaryFor prostate biopsy the sampling needle can be inserted through the rectum or through the perineum, which is the skin between the rectum and the scrotum. Our study confirms that in everyday clinical practice, prostate biopsy via the perineum can be carried out under local anaesthetic and without routine use of antibiotics because of its lower risk of infection. Patients reported low pain scores and positive ratings for the overall experience.