Impact of MRI/US fusion-guided prostate biopsy on biopsy-naïve patients: A single urologist's experience.

Objectives: To report our experience with imaging-guided targeted prostate biopsy (IGTpBx) for patients undergoing initial prostate biopsy in a clinical setting. Materials and methods: From July 2014 to February 2020, 305 men who had IGTpBx performed as their first prostate biopsy were enrolled. Two dedicated magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) radiologists segmented at least 1 region of interest (ROI) for each of these men using screening 1.5T MRI images. A single urologist employed the robotic-assisted Artemis MRI/ultrasonography (US) fusion platform to obtain 2-3 targeted samples from each ROI and additional random samples from the zones of the prostate outside the ROIs (a total of 12 zonal samples). Biopsy outcomes were categorized based on the Gleason score (GS) grade group (GG) as no cancer, favorable (GG < 3 or GS < 4 + 3), or clinically significant (GG ≥ 3 or GS ≥ 4 + 3) cancer. Results: The overall cancer detection rate was 75%:31% clinically significant, 44% favorable, and 25% no cancer. These findings triggered active interventions in 176 (58%) patients. A prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level of 0-4 ng/mL was detected in 39 (66%) of 59 patients (32 favorable, 7 significant), 4-10 ng/mL in 147 (77%) of 190 patients (85 favorable, 62 significant), and 10 ng/mL and over in 44 (80%) of 55 patients (17 favorable, 27 significant). Conclusions: The tumor detection rate was 75% with IGTpBx in patients without a previous biopsy. In addition, about 42% of detected cancers were deemed clinically significant and led to active interventions. IGTpBx as a patient's first prostate biopsy improves the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer when compared with historical data for random systematic prostate biopsy.

Freehand versus Grid-Based Transperineal Prostate Biopsy: A Comparison of Anatomical Region Yield and Complications.

PURPOSE: The freehand (FH) technique of transperineal prostate biopsy using commercialized needle access systems facilitates a reduction in anesthesia requirements from general to local or local/sedation. We sought to compare the efficacy and complication rates of the FH method with those of the standard grid-based (GB) method. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The GB method was performed from 2014 to 2018, and the updated FH technique was performed from 2018 to 2020, yielding comparative cohorts of 174 and 304, respectively. RESULTS: The FH and GB techniques demonstrated equivalent yields of ≥Gleason grade group (GGG)-2 prostate cancer (PCa). The FH group had a significantly higher mean number of cores with ≥GGG-2 PCa involvement (p=0.011) but a significantly lower mean number of biopsy samples (p <0.01). The urinary retention rate of the GB group (10%) was significantly higher than that of the FH group (1%; p <0.01). The rates of ≥GGG-2 PCa involvement in the anterior (GB, 31%) and anteromedial (FH, 22%) sectors were higher than those in other sectors (range, 0%-9%). For multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging, the rate of ≥GGG-2 PCa detection in the anteromedial prostate (23%) was nearly half that in other locations (range, 38%-55%). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with GB transperineal biopsy, FH transperineal biopsy demonstrates an equivalent cancer yield with no risk of sepsis, a significantly reduced risk of urinary retention, and reduced anesthesia needs. The higher number of cores with ≥GGG-2 PCa involvement in the FH group suggests that FH transperineal biopsy can sample the prostate better than GB-transperineal biopsy can.

Focal therapy for localized prostate cancer: is there a "middle ground" between active surveillance and definitive treatment?

In recent years, it has come a long way in the diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up of prostate cancer. Beside this, it was argued that definitive treatments could cause overtreatment, particularly in the very low, low, and favorable risk group. When alternative treatment and follow-up methods are being considered for this group of patients, active surveillance is seen as a good alternative for patients with very low and low-risk groups in this era. However, it has become necessary to find other alternatives for patients in the favorable risk group or patients who cannot adopt active follow-up. In the light of technological developments, the concept of focal therapy was introduced with the intensification of research to treat only the lesioned area instead of treating the entire organ for prostate lesions though there are not many publications about many of them yet. According to the initial results, it was understood that the results could be good if the appropriate focal therapy technique was applied to the appropriate patient. Thus, focal therapies have begun to find their "middle ground" place between definitive therapies and active follow-up.

Mechanical failure with malleable penile prosthesis.

Mechanical failure with a malleable penile prosthesis is very rare, and no mechanical failure has been reported with the AMS 650 malleable penile prosthesis. A 67-year-old man, using the AMS 650 malleable penile prosthesis without a problem since 1999, presented with right penile deformity and difficulty in sexual intercourse for the preceding 2 months. Physical examination showed dislocation of the right rod of the penile prosthesis, and surgical exploration revealed a fracture in the rod. The malfunctioning right penile prosthesis was removed, and a new AMS 650 malleable penile prosthesis was implanted. The patient did not have any problem at 1-year follow-up.