7
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Hundred years of transperineal prostate biopsy

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The earliest recorded efforts to biopsy prostate, in the early 20th century, were made through transperineal (TP) approach, with open perineal prostate biopsy (PBx) being considered the gold standard for prostate cancer (PCa) diagnosis in that era. Later, to minimize morbidity and increase diagnostic accuracy, several technical modifications and transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) assistance were incorporated. However, in the 1980s, the transrectal (TR) approach became the predominant PBx method following the introduction of TRUS-TR PBx with sextant sampling, providing a convenient and efficacious method for prostate sampling. With modernization of PCa diagnosis, a recent resurgence of the TP PBx has been observed, driven primarily by TR drawbacks of infectious complications and sampling limitations. TP PBx is rapidly emerging as the new PBx standard, being officially recommended as the initial approach for biopsy in Europe and is increasingly being conducted and studied in the United States. The modern era of TP PBx is based on the improvements in local anesthesia techniques, TP access systems, and robotic assistance. These modifications and advancements have improved the ease of use, patient comfort, and diagnostic outcomes with TP PBx. Herein, we present a history of the evolution of TP PBx spanning over 100 years and explore the basis of the technique that merits future utilization.

          Related collections

          Most cited references91

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Global cancer statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries

          This article provides an update on the global cancer burden using the GLOBOCAN 2020 estimates of cancer incidence and mortality produced by the International Agency for Research on Cancer. Worldwide, an estimated 19.3 million new cancer cases (18.1 million excluding nonmelanoma skin cancer) and almost 10.0 million cancer deaths (9.9 million excluding nonmelanoma skin cancer) occurred in 2020. Female breast cancer has surpassed lung cancer as the most commonly diagnosed cancer, with an estimated 2.3 million new cases (11.7%), followed by lung (11.4%), colorectal (10.0 %), prostate (7.3%), and stomach (5.6%) cancers. Lung cancer remained the leading cause of cancer death, with an estimated 1.8 million deaths (18%), followed by colorectal (9.4%), liver (8.3%), stomach (7.7%), and female breast (6.9%) cancers. Overall incidence was from 2-fold to 3-fold higher in transitioned versus transitioning countries for both sexes, whereas mortality varied <2-fold for men and little for women. Death rates for female breast and cervical cancers, however, were considerably higher in transitioning versus transitioned countries (15.0 vs 12.8 per 100,000 and 12.4 vs 5.2 per 100,000, respectively). The global cancer burden is expected to be 28.4 million cases in 2040, a 47% rise from 2020, with a larger increase in transitioning (64% to 95%) versus transitioned (32% to 56%) countries due to demographic changes, although this may be further exacerbated by increasing risk factors associated with globalization and a growing economy. Efforts to build a sustainable infrastructure for the dissemination of cancer prevention measures and provision of cancer care in transitioning countries is critical for global cancer control.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            EAU-EANM-ESTRO-ESUR-SIOG Guidelines on Prostate Cancer. Part II—2020 Update: Treatment of Relapsing and Metastatic Prostate Cancer

            To present a summary of the 2020 version of the European Association of Urology (EAU)-European Association of Nuclear Medicine (EANM)-European Society for Radiotherapy & Oncology (ESTRO)-European Society of Urogenital Radiology (ESUR)-International Society of Geriatric Oncology (SIOG) guidelines on the treatment of relapsing, metastatic, and castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC).
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found

              Complications After Systematic, Random, and Image-guided Prostate Biopsy

              Prostate biopsy (PB) represents the gold standard method to confirm the presence of cancer. In addition to traditional random or systematic approaches, a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-guided technique has been introduced recently.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: InvestigationRole: Writing original draftRole: Writing review editing
                Role: InvestigationRole: Writing original draftRole: Writing review editing
                Role: Writing review editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Project administrationRole: SupervisionRole: Writing review editing
                Journal
                Ther Adv Urol
                Ther Adv Urol
                TAU
                sptau
                Therapeutic Advances in Urology
                SAGE Publications (Sage UK: London, England )
                1756-2872
                1756-2880
                21 May 2022
                Jan-Dec 2022
                : 14
                : 17562872221100590
                Affiliations
                [1-17562872221100590]Boonshoft School of Medicine, Wright State University, Dayton, OH 45435, USA
                [2-17562872221100590]University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, OH, USA
                [3-17562872221100590]Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, University of Cincinnati Medical Center, Cincinnati, OH, USA
                [4-17562872221100590]Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, University of Cincinnati Medical Center, Cincinnati, OH, USA
                Author notes
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8290-936X
                Article
                10.1177_17562872221100590
                10.1177/17562872221100590
                9128053
                35620643
                f7afe5cf-fc04-49bb-bb65-e98f9a09399b
                © The Author(s), 2022

                This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access page ( https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).

                History
                : 29 December 2021
                : 27 April 2022
                Categories
                Current Best Practice for Prostate Biopsy: What is the evidence?
                Review
                Custom metadata
                January-December 2022
                ts1

                prostate biopsy,transperineal,prostate cancer,prostate,urology

                Comments

                Comment on this article