Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2016 Sep;118(3):366-71.
doi: 10.1111/bju.13410. Epub 2016 Feb 12.

Complications after prostate biopsies in men on active surveillance and its effects on receiving further biopsies in the Prostate cancer Research International: Active Surveillance (PRIAS) study

Leonard P Bokhorst  1 , Inari Lepistö  2 , Yoshiyuki Kakehi  3 , Chris H Bangma  1 , Tom Pickles  4 , Riccardo Valdagni  5 , Arnout R Alberts  1 , Axel Semjonow  6 , Petra Strölin  7 , Manuel F Montesino  8 , Viktor Berge  9 , Monique J Roobol  1 , Antti Rannikko  2
Affiliations

Complications after prostate biopsies in men on active surveillance and its effects on receiving further biopsies in the Prostate cancer Research International: Active Surveillance (PRIAS) study

Leonard P Bokhorst et al. BJU Int. 2016 Sep.

Abstract

Objective: To study the risk of serial prostate biopsies on complications in men on active surveillance (AS) and determine the effect of complications on receiving further biopsies.

Patients and methods: In the global Prostate cancer Research International: Active Surveillance (PRIAS) study, men are prospectively followed on AS and repeat prostate biopsies are scheduled at 1, 4, and 7 years after the diagnostic biopsy, or once yearly if prostate-specific antigen-doubling time is <10 years. Data on complications after biopsy, including infection, haematuria, haematospermia, and pain, were retrospectively collected for all biopsies taken during follow-up in men from several large participating centres. Generalised estimating equations were used to test predictors of infection after biopsy. Competing risk analysis was used to compare the rates of men receiving further biopsies between men with and without previous complications.

Results: In all, 2 184 biopsies were taken in 1 164 men. Infection was reported after 55 biopsies (2.5%), and one in five men reported any form of complication. At multivariable analysis, the number of previous biopsies was not a significant predictor of infection (odds ratio 1.04, 95% confidence interval 0.76-1.43). The only significant predictor for infection was the type of prophylaxis used. Of all men with a complication at the diagnostic or first repeat biopsy, 21% did not have a repeat biopsy at the time a repeat biopsy was scheduled according to protocol, vs 12% for men without a previous biopsy complication.

Conclusion: In our present cohort of men on AS, we found no evidence that repeat prostate biopsy in itself posed a risk of infection. However, complications after biopsy were not uncommon and after a complication men were less likely to have further biopsies. We should aim to safely reduce the amount of repeat biopsies in men on AS.

Keywords: active surveillance; biopsy; complication; infection; perineal; prostatic neoplasms.

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles
-