ArticleBJU international2025
Transperineal prostate biopsy under local vs general anaesthesia: a cost-effectiveness analysis.
Article in BJU international, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Pain and patient-reported experience after freehand transperineal prostate biopsy under local anaesthesia.BJUI compass · 2026Article
- Effect of Anesthesia Type on Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer Detection in Transperineal MRI-Targeted Biopsy.Cancers · 2026Article
- Successes and challenges in developing a magnetic resonance imaging-transrectal ultrasound machine fusion prostate biopsy service.Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada · 2026Review
- Day surgery mode of multi-modal image AI fusion targeted transperineal biopsy technique using electromagnetic navigation tracking system under local anesthesia.BMC urology · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo estimate the cost effectiveness of local anaesthetic (LA) transperineal prostate biopsy (TPB) compared to general anaesthetic (GA) TPB, considering both hospital/health system and societal perspectives. PATIENTS AND
methodsIndividual-patient data from a prospective pilot study of 80 patients who underwent LA (n = 40) or GA (n = 40) TPB according to patient preference was used. A cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted using a decision tree model considering cancer detection rates, perioperative and return to work considerations between LA and GA TPB. The economic model included costs associated with consumables, device (capital, maintenance) and personnel for each approach. Cost-effectiveness was evaluated in terms of the incremental cost/quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and incremental net monetary benefit. Probabilistic and one-way sensitivity analyses were performed.
resultsClinical parameters were generally similar between groups, including overall (55%) and significant (35% vs 23%; P = 0.32) cancer detection and procedure-specific duration (20 vs 21 min; P = 0.53). Total procedure and recovery durations were longer in the GA group by 8 min (P < 0.001) and 32.5 min (P < 0.001), respectively. Participants in the LA group returned to work earlier than the GA group (2 vs 4 days; P = 0.046). There was a marginal gain in QALYs between the LA and GA groups (0.82385 vs 0.82383), but LA TPB had lower costs (Australian dollars [AU$]715.80 vs AU$1673.58), with an estimated average cost savings of ~AU$959. From the societal perspective, driven by the reduction in productivity loss, the average cost savings with LA TPB were ~AU$1639. Sensitivity analyses showed the probability of LA being cost effective was 100%, while utilisation of operating theatre for GA TPB was the main driver of cost difference.
conclusionPerforming TPB via the LA approach would be cost-saving from both hospital and societal perspectives without reducing the accuracy of the biopsy.
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.