Is prostate biopsy safe in the elderly?
Yıl: 2021 Cilt: 14 Sayı: 2 Sayfa Aralığı: 388 - 394 Metin Dili: İngilizce DOI: 10.31362/patd.827622 İndeks Tarihi: 17-06-2021
Is prostate biopsy safe in the elderly?
Öz: Purpose: The study was aimed to investigate the safety of the transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate needlebiopsy in the elderly.Material and methods: Five hundered fifteen patients, who underwent prostate biopsy between 2017-2020,were included in the study. All patients' demographic data, comorbidities, laboratory findings, prostate volumes,prostate biopsy pathology results, and post-biopsy complications were retrospectively analyzed. The patientswere divided into 2 groups: group-1 consisting of patients under the age of 65 and group-2 with above the ageof 65.Results: There were 244 in group-1 and 271 patients in group-2. The mean age of group-1 was 59.50±3.98,group-2 was 71.45±4.57 years. In group-1, post-biopsy fever was observed in 5 (2%), hematuria in 44 (18%),hemospermia in 79 (32.4%), and rectal bleeding in 7 (2.9%) patients. In group-2, post-biopsy fever was observedin 15 (5.5%), hematuria in 69 (25.5%), hemospermia in 21 (7.7%), and rectal bleeding in 11 (4.1%) patients. Thesevere sepsis findings were observed in 2 patients (0.2%) in group-1 and 6 (2.2%) in group-2. In the logisticregression-analysis, it was determined that the risk of complication increased significantly as the age, PSA, andhigher PSA density.Conclusion: In our study, it was revealed that the risk of complications was higher in the elderly and that thecomplications observed may be more seriously. Therefore, we consider that a more careful approach should betaken in elderly patients to prevent the complications related with prostate biopsy.
Anahtar Kelime: Prostat biyopsisi yaşlılarda güvenli mi?
Öz: Amaç: Bu çalışma prostat kanseri tanısında yaygın olarak kullanılan transrektal ultrason (TRUS) eşliğinde prostat iğne biyopsisinin yaşlı hastalarda ne kadar güvenli olduğunu ortaya koymayı amaçlamaktadır. Gereç ve yöntem: 2017-2020 arasında prostat biyopsisi yapılan 515 hasta çalışmaya dahil edildi. Tüm hastaların demografik verileri, ek hastalıkları, laboratuar bulguları, prostat hacimleri, prostat biyopsisi patoloji sonuçları, biyopsi sonrası gelişen komplikasyonlar retrospektif olarak incelendi. Hastalar 65 yaş altı olanlar grup 1 ve 65 yaş üstü olanlar grup 2 olarak 2 gruba ayrıldı. Her iki grupta prostat biyopsisi sonrası görülen komplikasyonlar karşılaştırıldı. Bulgular: Grup 1’de 244, grup 2’de ise 271 hasta vardı. Grup 1 yaş ortalaması 59,50±3,98, grup 2 yaş ortalaması 71,45±4,57 idi. Grup 1’de 5 hastada biyopsi sonrası ateş (%2), 44 hastada hematüri (%18), 79 hastada hematospermi (%32,4), 7 hastada ise rektal kanama (%2,9) izlendi. Grup 2’de ise 15 hastada biyopsi sonrası ateş (%5,5), 69 hastada hematüri (%25,5), 21 hastada hematospermi (%7,7), 11 hastada rektal kanama (%4,1) görüldü. Ancak bu komplikasyonlar dışında grup 1’de 2 hastada (%0,2), grup 2’de 6 hastada (%2,2) ciddi sepsis bulguları izlendi ve hastalar hospitalize edilerek tedavi edildi. Prostat biyopsisi sonrası komplikasyon görülmesini etkileyen risk faktörlerini incelemek için yapılan logistik regresyon analizinde yaş, PSA ve PSA dansitesi yükseldikçe komplikasyon görülme riskinin anlamlı olarak arttığı tespit edildi. Sonuç: Çalışmada yaşlı hastalarda komplikasyon görülme riskinin daha yüksek olduğunu ve görülen komplikasyonların daha ciddi olabileceği ortaya kondu. Bu nedenle yaşlı hastalarda prostat biyopsisi öncesi ve sonrası komplikasyon gelişimini önlemek için daha dikkatli yaklaşmak gerektiği düşünüldü.
Anahtar Kelime: Belge Türü: Makale Makale Türü: Araştırma Makalesi Erişim Türü: Erişime Açık
- 1. Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Dikshit R, et al. Cancer incidence and mortality worldwide: sources, methods and major patterns in GLOBOCAN 2012. Int J Cancer 2015;136:359-386. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijc.29210
- 2. Mottet N, Cornford P, van den Bergh RCN, et al. EAU Guidelines on Prostate Cancer. Eur Urol 2019;76:871. Available at: http://www.uroweb.org/guidelines. Accessed October 20, 2020
- 3. Wammack R, Djavan B, Mesut R, Susani M, Marberger M. Morbidity of transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate needle biopsy in patients receiving immunosuppression. Urology 2001;58:1004-1007. https://doi.org/10.1016/ s0090-4295(01)01406-6
- 4. Wenzel M, Theissen L, Preisser F, et al. Complication rates after TRUS guided transrectal systematic and MRI-targeted prostate biopsies in a high-risk region for antibiotic resistances. Front Surg 2020;7:7. https://doi. org/10.3389/fsurg.2020.00007
- 5. Loeb S, Vellekoop A, Ahmed HU, et al. Systematic review of complications of prostate biopsy. Eur Urol 2013;64:876-892. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. eururo.2013.05.049
- 6. Bruyère F, Malavaud S, Bertrand P, et al. Prosbiotate: a multicenter, prospective analysis of infectious complications after prostatebiopsy. J Urol 2015;193:145- 150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2014.07.086
- 7. World Health Organization. Psychogeriatrics. Report of a WHO scientific group. World Health Organ Tech Rep Ser 1972;507:1-48. Available at: https://pubmed.ncbi. nlm.nih.gov/4627568/. Accessed October 20, 2020
- 8. Kaye KS, Anderson DJ, Sloane R, et al. The impact of surgical site infection on older operative patients. Am Geriatr Soc 2009;57:46-54. https://doi.org/10.1111/ j.1532-5415.2008.02053.x
- 9. Charlson ME, Pompei P, Ales KL, et al. A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation. J Chron Dis 1987;40:373. https://doi.org/10.1016/0021- 9681(87)90171-8
- 10. Borghesi M, Ahmed H, Nam R, et al. Complications After Systematic, Random, and Image-guided Prostate Biopsy. Eur Urol 2017;71:353-365. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.eururo.2016.08.004
- 11. Pinsky P, Parnes H, Andriole G. Mortality and complications following prostate biopsy in the PLCO cancer screening trial. BJU Int 2014;113:254-259. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.12368
- 12. Dell’Atti L. Ultrasound detection of prostatic calculi as a parameter to predict the appearance of hemospermia after a prostate biopsy. Int Braz J Urol 2017;43:1136-1143. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1677- 5538.IBJU.2016.0005
- 13. Abdelkhalek M, Abdelshafy M, Elhelaly H, Kamal M. Hemosepermia after transrectal ultrasoundguided prostatic biopsy: a prospective study. Urol Ann 2013;5:30-33. https://doi.org/10.4103/0974- 7796.106963
- 14. Brewster DH, Fischbacher CM, Nolan J, Nowell S, Redpath D, Nabi G. Risk of hospitalization and death following prostate biopsy in Scotland. Public Health 2017;142:102-110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. puhe.2016.10.006
- 15. Toner L, Bolton D, Lawrentschuk N. Prevention of sepsis prior to prostate biopsy. ICUrology 2016;57:94- 99. https://doi.org/10.4111/icu.2016.57.2.94
- 16. Anderson E, Leahy O, Cheng A, Grummet J. Risk factors for infection following prostate biopsy - a case control study. BMC Infect Dis 2015;15:580. https://doi. org/10.1186/s12879-015-1328-7
- 17. Jones T, Radtke J.P, Hadaschik B, Marks L. Optimizing safety and accuracy of prostate biopsy. Curr Opin Urol 2016;26:472-480. https://doi.org/10.1097/ MOU.0000000000000310
- 18. Grummet JP, Weerakoon M, Huang S, et al. Sepsis and “superbugs”: should we favour the transperineal over the transrectal approach for prostate biopsy? BJU Int 2014;114:384-388. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.12536
- 19. Loeb S, Carter H, Berndt S, Ricker W, Schaeffer E. Is repeat prostate biopsy associated with a greater risk of hospitalization? Data from SEER-Medicare. J Urol 2013;189:867-870. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. juro.2012.10.005 Ethics commi
| APA | Alkis O, baser a, IVELIK H, Aras B, sevim m, Kartal I (2021). Is prostate biopsy safe in the elderly?. , 388 - 394. 10.31362/patd.827622 |
| Chicago | Alkis Okan,baser aykut,IVELIK HALIL IBRAHIM,Aras Bekir,sevim mehmet,Kartal Ibrahim Is prostate biopsy safe in the elderly?. (2021): 388 - 394. 10.31362/patd.827622 |
| MLA | Alkis Okan,baser aykut,IVELIK HALIL IBRAHIM,Aras Bekir,sevim mehmet,Kartal Ibrahim Is prostate biopsy safe in the elderly?. , 2021, ss.388 - 394. 10.31362/patd.827622 |
| AMA | Alkis O,baser a,IVELIK H,Aras B,sevim m,Kartal I Is prostate biopsy safe in the elderly?. . 2021; 388 - 394. 10.31362/patd.827622 |
| Vancouver | Alkis O,baser a,IVELIK H,Aras B,sevim m,Kartal I Is prostate biopsy safe in the elderly?. . 2021; 388 - 394. 10.31362/patd.827622 |
| IEEE | Alkis O,baser a,IVELIK H,Aras B,sevim m,Kartal I "Is prostate biopsy safe in the elderly?." , ss.388 - 394, 2021. 10.31362/patd.827622 |
| ISNAD | Alkis, Okan vd. "Is prostate biopsy safe in the elderly?". (2021), 388-394. https://doi.org/10.31362/patd.827622 |
| APA | Alkis O, baser a, IVELIK H, Aras B, sevim m, Kartal I (2021). Is prostate biopsy safe in the elderly?. Pamukkale Tıp Dergisi, 14(2), 388 - 394. 10.31362/patd.827622 |
| Chicago | Alkis Okan,baser aykut,IVELIK HALIL IBRAHIM,Aras Bekir,sevim mehmet,Kartal Ibrahim Is prostate biopsy safe in the elderly?. Pamukkale Tıp Dergisi 14, no.2 (2021): 388 - 394. 10.31362/patd.827622 |
| MLA | Alkis Okan,baser aykut,IVELIK HALIL IBRAHIM,Aras Bekir,sevim mehmet,Kartal Ibrahim Is prostate biopsy safe in the elderly?. Pamukkale Tıp Dergisi, vol.14, no.2, 2021, ss.388 - 394. 10.31362/patd.827622 |
| AMA | Alkis O,baser a,IVELIK H,Aras B,sevim m,Kartal I Is prostate biopsy safe in the elderly?. Pamukkale Tıp Dergisi. 2021; 14(2): 388 - 394. 10.31362/patd.827622 |
| Vancouver | Alkis O,baser a,IVELIK H,Aras B,sevim m,Kartal I Is prostate biopsy safe in the elderly?. Pamukkale Tıp Dergisi. 2021; 14(2): 388 - 394. 10.31362/patd.827622 |
| IEEE | Alkis O,baser a,IVELIK H,Aras B,sevim m,Kartal I "Is prostate biopsy safe in the elderly?." Pamukkale Tıp Dergisi, 14, ss.388 - 394, 2021. 10.31362/patd.827622 |
| ISNAD | Alkis, Okan vd. "Is prostate biopsy safe in the elderly?". Pamukkale Tıp Dergisi 14/2 (2021), 388-394. https://doi.org/10.31362/patd.827622 |
