ArticleCureus2024
Evaluating Transperineal Prostate Biopsies Performed by a New Operator: A Prospective Clinical Audit at Dorset County Hospital.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
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.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.