Ultrasound/MRI-targeted biopsy versus saturated trans-rectal ultrasound guided biopsy of prostate in patients with primary negative conventional biopsy and still elevated PSA: a prospective randomized clinical trial.

INTRODUCTION: To evaluate and compare the rate of cancer detection by two methods Saturated TRUS guided biopsy and ultrasound/magnetic resonance imaging (US/MRI)-targeted biopsy in patients with primary negative prostate cancer in standard 12 cores biopsy evaluation but still have elevated prostate specific antigen (PSA). MATERIALS AND METHODS: From 105 patients who met our inclusion criteria, 53 patients underwent US/MRI-targeted biopsy and 52 remaining patients underwent Saturated 20 core TRUS guided biopsy in a prospective randomized clinical trial. RESULTS: The mean age (±SD) was 62.2 (±8.2) year. The mean PSA (±SD) was 11.8 (±7.5) ng/ml. The mean prostate volume was 56.1 (±24.8) ml. Adenocarcinoma of prostate was detected in 9/52 (17.3%) patients in groups saturated biopsy and 14/53 (26.4%) patients in US/MRI-targeted biopsy group and there was no difference in cancer detection rate between 2 groups (P=0.252). except four patients with fever (two in each group), there was no other serious complication (Clavien grade 3 or higher) occurred in the patients. In the multivariate analysis, higher pre-procedure PSA, lower size of the prostate, pathology of ASAP and presence of nodule in DRE were independent predictors for cancer detection in second biopsy (P=0.036, P<0.001, P=0.013 and P=0.031, respectively). CONCLUSION: We didn't find any superiority in cancer detection rate and any different in complication rate between these two methods saturated TRUS guided biopsy and US/MRI-targeted biopsy.

Comparing the Efficacy and Safety of Ultrasonic Versus Pneumatic Lithotripsy in Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Percutaneous nephrolitotomy (PCNL) is the preferred treatment for large renal stones. There is a need for more comparative data for different lithotripters used in PCNL. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the comparative safety and efficacy of ultrasonic and pneumatic lithotripsy in patients undergoing PCNL. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This randomized clinical trial was conducted at Labbafinejad University Hospital, Tehran, Iran. A total of 180 patients were selected and divided randomly into two groups: 88 patients to pneumatic and 92 to ultrasonic lithotripsy. INTERVENTION: Standard fluoroscopy-guided PCNL was performed using pneumatic or ultrasonic lithotripsy. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The primary outcome was the procedure success rate. We also evaluated other outcome measures including operation time, stone fragmentation and removal time (SFRT), length of hospital stay, and postoperative complications. We used SPSS software version 18.0 for data analysis. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The two groups were similar in baseline characteristics. There were no significant differences between the groups in stone fragmentation and removal time (p=0.63), stone free rate (p=0.44), and hospital stay (p=0.66). SFRT for hard stones was shorter using pneumatic lithotripsy (p<0.001). By contrast, ultrasonic lithotripsy was associated with a shorter SFRT for soft stones (p<0.001). Postoperative complications were similar in the two groups. A limitation of this study might be the 3-mo follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS: In general, there were no significant differences in the success rate and complications between pneumatic and ultrasonic lithotripsy. SFRT was significantly shorter using pneumatic lithotripsy for hard stones, and ultrasonic lithotripsy for soft stones. PATIENT SUMMARY: We found no significant differences in the success rate and complications of percutaneous nephrolitotomy using pneumatic and ultrasonic lithotripsy. Ultrasonic and pneumatic lithotripsy differed in the time for stone fragmentation and removal for hard and soft stones.