Abnormalities detected on digital rectal examinations in dogs are common and influence diagnostic and treatment plans.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the frequency of abnormal findings on digital rectal examination (DRE) performed during physical examinations at a tertiary referral veterinary hospital, to establish what abnormal findings are most common and whether they impact diagnostic and treatment plans, and to assess whether patient signalment or admitting service influences the frequency of abnormalities. ANIMALS: Client-owned dogs (n = 440). METHODS: Veterinarians performed DREs on dogs as part of a physical examination. Patient signalment and DRE findings were recorded in a standardized survey. Findings were deemed normal or abnormal and described. Whether the findings changed the diagnostic or treatment plan was also recorded. RESULTS: Abnormalities were detected on DRE in 160 of 440 (36%) dogs. Changes to the diagnostic plan occurred in 41 of 160 (26%) cases when an abnormality was found. Changes to the treatment plan occurred in 20 of 160 (12.5%) cases when an abnormality was found. Age (P = .2), sex (P = .9), and breed (P = 1) did not significantly influence the frequency of abnormal findings. Abnormal findings were significantly more common in dogs presenting to the emergency service than elective services (P = .005). CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Among dogs presenting to a tertiary veterinary hospital, abnormalities found on DRE are common and change the diagnostic plan in 1 out of 4 dogs and treatment plan in 1 out of 8 dogs. This study supports the continued practice of DREs in dogs, especially in emergency settings, regardless of signalment.

'Low' faecal immunochemical test (FIT) colorectal cancer: a 4-year comparison of the Nottingham '4F' protocol with FIT10 in symptomatic patients.

AIM: The aim of this work was to evaluate colorectal cancer (CRC) outcomes after 'low' (sub-threshold) faecal immunochemical test (FIT) results in symptomatic patients tested in primary care. METHOD: This work comprised a retrospective audit of 35 289 patients with FIT results who had consulted their general practitioner with lower gastrointestinal symptoms and had subsequent CRC diagnoses. The Rapid Colorectal Cancer Diagnosis pathway was introduced in November 2017 to allow incorporation of FIT into clinical practice. The local '4F' protocol combined FIT results with blood tests and digital rectal examination (DRE): FIT, full blood count, ferritin and finger [DRE]. The outcome used was detection rates of CRC, missed CRC and time to diagnosis in local 4F protocols for patients with a subthreshold faecal haemoglobin (fHb) result compared with thresholds of 10 and 20 µg Hb/g faeces. RESULTS: A single threshold of 10 µg Hb/g faeces identifies a population in whom the risk of CRC is 0.2%, but this would have missed 63 (10.5%) of 599 CRCs in this population. The Nottingham 4F protocol would have missed fewer CRCs [42 of 599 (7%)] despite using a threshold of 20 µg Hb/g faeces for patients with normal blood tests. Subthreshold FIT results in patients subsequently diagnosed with a palpable rectal tumour yielded the longest delays in diagnosis. CONCLUSION: A combination of FIT with blood results and DRE (the 4F protocol) reduced the risk of missed or delayed diagnosis. Further studies on the impact of such protocols on the diagnostic accuracy of FIT are expected. The value of adding blood tests to FIT may be restricted to specific parts of the fHb results spectrum.

Comparing the Performance of Digital Rectal Examination and Prostate-specific Antigen as a Screening Test for Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Although digital rectal examination (DRE) is recommended in combination with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) for detection of prostate cancer (PCa), there are limited data to support its use as a screening/early detection test. Our objective was to assess the diagnostic value of DRE in screening for early detection of PCa. METHODS: In August 2023, we queried the PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases to identify prospective studies simultaneously investigating the diagnostic performance of DRE and PSA for PCa screening. The primary endpoints were the positive predictive value (PPV) and cancer detection rate (CDR) of DRE. Secondary endpoints included the PPV and CDR of both PSA alone and in combination with DRE. We conducted meta-regression analysis to compare the CDR and PPV of different screening strategies. This meta-analysis is registered on PROSPERO (CRD42023446940). KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS: We identified eight studies involving 85 738 participants, of which three were randomized controlled trials and five were prospective diagnostic studies, that reported the PPV and CDR of both DRE and PSA for the same cohort. Our analysis revealed a pooled PPV of 0.21 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.13-0.33) for DRE, which is similar to the PPV of PSA (0.22, 95% CI 0.15-0.30; p = 0.9), with no benefit from combining DRE and PSA (PPV 0.19, 95% CI 0.13-0.26; p = 0.5). However, the CDR of DRE (0.01, 95% CI: 0.01-0.02) was significantly lower than that of PSA (0.03, 95% CI 0.02-0.03; p < 0.05) and the combination of DRE and PSA (0.03, 95% CI 0.02-0.04; p < 0.05). The screening strategy combining DRE and PSA was not different to that of PSA alone in terms of CDR (p = 0.5) and PPV (p = 0.5). CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Our comprehensive review and meta-analysis indicates that both as an independent test and as a supplementary measure to PSA for PCa detection, DRE exhibits a notably low diagnostic value. The collective findings from the included studies suggest that, in the absence of clinical symptoms and signs, DRE could be potentially omitted from PCa screening and early detection strategies. PATIENT SUMMARY: Our review shows that the screening performance of digital rectal examination for detection of prostate cancer is not particularly impressive, suggesting that it might not be necessary to conduct this examination routinely.

The Role of Digital Rectal Examination Prostate Volume Category in the Early Detection of Prostate Cancer: Its Correlation with the Magnetic Resonance Imaging Prostate Volume.

PURPOSE: To relate the prostate volume category (PVC) assessed with digital rectal examination (DRE)-small, median, and large-and the prostate volumes (PVs) assessed with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and transrectal ultrasound (TRUS). To compare the clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) discrimination ability of two predictive models based on DRE-PVC and MRI-PV. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective trial of 2,090 men with prostate-specific antigen >3 ng/mL and/or PCa suspicious DRE were prospectively recruited in 10 centers from Catalonia (Spain), between 2021 and 2022, in whom DRE-PVC was assessed. Pre-biopsy MRI, and 12-core TRUS-random biopsy was always performed after 2- to 6-core TRUS-fusion targeted biopsy of prostate imaging-report and data system >3 lesions. In 370 men (17.7%) the DRE-PVC was unconclusive. Among the 1,720 men finally analyzed the csPCa (grade group >2) detection was 42.4%. RESULTS: The median (interquartile range) of TRUS and MRI-PVs of small prostates were 33 mL (19-37 mL) and 35 mL (23-30 mL), p=0.410; in median prostates they were 51 mL (38-58 mL) and 55 mL (48-63 mL) respectively, p<0.001; in large prostates 80 mL (60-100 mL) and 95 mL (75-118 mL) respectively, p<0.001. The predictive models sharing the MRI-PV and DRE-PVC showed areas under the curves of 0.832 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.813-0.851) and 0.828 (95% CI, 0.809-0.848) respectively, p=0.632, as well as similar net benefit and clinical utility. CONCLUSIONS: PVC was unconclusive in 17% of DREs. MRI-PV overestimated the TRUS-PV in median and large prostates. The predictive models based on MRI-PV and DRE-PVC showed similar efficacy to predict csPCa. PVC assessed with DRE is helpful to predict the csPCa risk before MRI.

Difficult defecation in constipated patients: Diagnosis by minimally invasive diagnostic tests.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Defecation Disorders (DD) are a frequent cause of refractory chronic constipation. DD diagnosis requires anorectal physiology testing. Our aim was to evaluate the accuracy and Odds Ratio (OR) of a straining question (SQ) and a digital rectal examination (DRE) augmented by abdomen palpation on predicting a DD diagnosis in refractory CC patients. METHODS: Two hundred and thirty-eight constipated patients were enrolled. Patients underwent SQ, augmented DRE and balloon evacuation test before entering the study and after a 30-day fiber/laxative trial. All patients underwent anorectal manometry. OR and accuracy were calculated for SQ and augmented DRE for both dyssynergic defecation and inadequate propulsion. RESULTS: "Anal Muscles" response was associated to both dyssynergic defecation and inadequate propulsion, with an OR of 13.6 and 5.85 and an accuracy of 78.5% and 66.4%, respectively. "Failed anal relaxation" on augmented DRE was associated with dyssynergic defecation, with an OR of 21.4 and an accuracy of 73.1%. "Failed abdominal contraction" on augmented DRE was associated with inadequate propulsion with an OR >100 and an accuracy of 97.1%. CONCLUSIONS: Our data support screening constipated patients for DD by SQ and augmented DRE to improve management and appropriateness of referral to biofeedback.

Value of digital rectal examination in patients with suspected prostate cancer: a prospective cohort analysis study.

Background: Digital rectal examination (DRE) is a straightforward, cost-effective, practical, and time-honored physical examination method that plays a valuable role in the detection of prostate cancer (PCa). Nevertheless, with the advent of the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) era, the necessity of performing DRE has become a subject of debate. Our aim was to investigate the diagnostic efficacy and adjunctive role of DRE in a population (Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS), PI-RADS ≥3 or PSA ≥4 ng/mL) suspected of PCa. Methods: Five hundred and ninety-seven patients with suspected PCa requiring referral for biopsy were prospectively enrolled consecutively from February 2020 to May 2021. All patients received DRE and corresponding clinical diagnosis by a urologist before biopsy. According to the collected clinical and pathological information, the diagnostic performance of DRE in different PSA stratifications, and its association with tumor location and Gleason score (GS) were statistically analyzed. Results: Among patients with suspected cancer, the diagnostic accuracy of DRE was 63.45%. Compared with central zone or transition zone tumors, the recall rate of peripheral zone PCa with DRE-positive results was higher (65.50% vs. 34.55%). DRE-positive results were significantly correlated with GS ≥7 PCa (P<0.001), and the average GS of DRE-positive PCa patients was significantly higher than that of DRE-negative (7.92 vs. 7.11, P<0.001). Conclusions: DRE may help physicians further judge the necessity of biopsy in patients with elevated PSA, and preliminarily estimate the location and invasiveness of the tumor. However, it is still necessary to explore the value of DRE in a normal PSA population.

Evaluation of Patients Referred for Abnormal Digital Rectal Examination With Normal Prostate-Specific Antigen on Best Timed Pathway for Prostate Cancer.

Introduction Currently, there is no recommendation for adjustments to the Best Timed Pathway for Prostate cancer (BTiPP) depending on whether the referral is for raised prostate-specific antigen (PSA) or malignant-feeling prostate on digital rectal examination (DRE). Therefore, all patients undergo MRI scanning. We aim to establish if patients with abnormal DRE only (without raised PSA) should have an adjusted pathway by comparing the biopsy rate and diagnostic yield after an MRI scan. Methods All BTiPP 2021 referral patient notes were reviewed. The patients were categorized into the aDRE group (abnormal DRE with normal PSA) or the rPSA group (raised PSA with or without abnormal DRE). Data and results for MRI and prostate biopsy were evaluated. Diagnostic yield was defined as the percentage of patients who underwent an MRI, who were diagnosed with biopsy-proven cancer. Results 68.5% (74/108) and 70.9% (282/398) of patients underwent upfront MRI in the aDRE and rPSA groups, respectively. Following MRI, the biopsy rate (28.4% (21/74) vs. 42.9% (121/282) (p=0.02)) and the biopsy-proven diagnostic yield (20.3% (15/74) vs. 36.9% (104/282) (p<0.01)) were both significantly lower in the aDRE group. 58% (43/74) of patients in the aDRE group had no posterior lesions on MRI. Only 6.7% (1/15) of biopsy-proven cancers in the aDRE group were solely anterior. Conclusions After MRI, the biopsy rate and diagnostic yield were significantly lower in the aDRE group compared to the rPSA group. Furthermore, a majority of patients referred for aDRE had a normal posterior prostate appearance on MRI. An adjusted pathway for patients referred for aDRE with normal PSA, with DRE by a urologist prior to MRI, should be considered as it would likely reduce unnecessary investigations, treatment, and patient anxiety. These data suggest that this would not risk missing significant cancers.

Digital Rectal Examination Is Not a Useful Screening Test for Prostate Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Annual digital rectal examination (DRE) is recommended as a stand-alone screening test for prostate cancer (PCa) in Germany for 45+ yr olds. DRE diagnostic performance in men as young as 45 yr old has not been proved by a screening trial. OBJECTIVE: To determine DRE diagnostic performance in a screening trial. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This analysis was conducted within the multicentric, randomized PROBASE trial, which enrolled >46 000 men at age 45 to test risk-adapted prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening for PCa. INTERVENTION: (1) DRE was analyzed as a one-time, stand-alone screening offer at age 45 in 6537 men in one arm of the trial and (2) PCa detection by DRE was evaluated at the time of PSA-screen-driven biopsies (N = 578). OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: (1) True-/false-positive detection rates of DRE as compared with PSA screening and (2) DRE outcome at the time of a prostate biopsy were evaluated. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: (1) A prospective analysis of 57 men with suspicious DRE at age 45 revealed three PCa. Detection rate by DRE was 0.05% (three of 6537) as compared with a four-fold higher rate by PSA screening (48 of 23 301, 0.21%). The true-positive detection rate by DRE relative to screening by PSA was 0.22 (95% confidence interval [CI] = [0.07-0.72]) and the false-positive detection rate by DRE was 2.2 (95% CI = [1.50-3.17]). (2) Among PSA-screen-detected PCa cases, 86% had unsuspicious DRE (sensitivity relative to PSA was 14%), with the majority of these tumors (86%) located in the potentially accessible zones of the prostate as seen by magnetic resonance imaging. CONCLUSIONS: The performance of stand-alone DRE to screen for PCa is poor. DRE should not be recommended as a PCa screening test in young men. Furthermore, DRE does not improve the detection of PSA-screen-detected PCa. PATIENT SUMMARY: Our report demonstrated the poor diagnostic performance of digital rectal examination in the screening for prostate cancer in young men.

Prospective analysis of the diagnostic accuracy of digital rectal examination and magnetic resonance imaging for T staging of prostate cancer.

Background: Accurate staging of prostate cancer (PCa) is the basis for the risk stratification to select targeted treatment. Therefore, this study aimed to compare the diagnostic accuracy rates of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and digital rectal examination (DRE) for preoperative T staging of potentially resectable PCa. Methods: From March 2021 to March 2022, patients with PCa with T staging by prostate biopsy were included. All examinations used postoperative histopathologic T staging as the reference standard. All patients underwent DRE and MRI before the puncture. Two blinded urologists and radiologists independently evaluated DRE and MRI, respectively. Before the examination, patients were then divided into early- (T1, T2) and late-(T3, T4) stage cancer. Analysis of a paired sample sign test was performed to determine differences between DRE and MRI. Results: A total of 136 study participants with PCa were evaluated histopathologically, of whom 71% (97/136) and 29% (39/136) were at the early- and late-stage cancer, respectively. MRI had a significantly higher accuracy (91.9% vs. 76.5%, P < 0.001) compared with DRE. Further, MRI showed a higher sensitivity than DRE to diagnose early PCa (92.8% vs. 74.2%; P < 0.001). However, the specificity was not significantly different between them (89.7% vs. 82.1%; P = 0.375). Area under the curve (receiver operating curve) values were calculated as 0.78 ± 0.038 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.71-0.86), 0.91 ± 0.028 (95% CI, 0.86-0.97), and 0.872 ± 0.028 (95% CI, 0.80-0.92) for DRE-, MRI-, MRI + DRE-based PCa predictions, respectively. The prediction performance of MRI was better than that of DRE (DeLong test, z = 3.632, P = 0.0003) and MRI + DRE (DeLong test, z = 3.715, P = 0.0002). Conclusion: For resectable PCa, the diagnostic potential of MRI in assessing the T stage was higher than that of DRE. However, DRE is still valuable, especially for patients with locally advanced PCa.

Compatibility of the radical prostatectomy specimen findings with digital rectal examination.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this research is to evaluate the compatibility of the pathological grading of prostate carcinoma in transrectal biopsy sample (TRUS), Gleason scores 3 + 3 = 6, and a palpable nodule in digital rectal examination (DRE) with radical prostatectomy samples in patients with prostate cancer. METHODS: Sixty-one patients with prostate cancer were included. Transrectal biopsy of the prostate and Gleason score were recorded in the histopathological report of the radical prostatectomy sample independently for each patient. RESULTS: The mean ± standard deviation of PSA level in patients was 8.52 ± 2.23. The average prostate volume was 46.0 ± 12.17 ml. The average density of PSA was 20.06 ± 7.74 ml. The results revealed that 36% of the people after surgery had similar pathology compared to the score before surgery (Gleason score 3 + 3 = 6) while 64% had non-homogeneous reporting (Gleason score 3 + 4 = 7 and other results). The study showed that low prostate volume before surgery was associated with a higher Gleason score after surgery. Although there was no significant relationship between PSA level above 10 before surgery and higher Gleason scores after surgery, there was a statistically significant relationship between PSA density above 15% and higher Gleason scores after surgery (P < 0.001). PSA density was a strong predictor for postoperative Gleason score (P = 0.004). CONCLUSION: The high level of PSA density before surgery increased the risk of higher Gleason scores after surgery by 95.99%. Over 64% of the individuals had inconsistency in tumor upgrading, and the palpable firm nodule in the DRE should not be ignored.

The Diagnostic Accuracy of Prostate-Specific Antigen and Digital Rectal Examination in the Diagnosis of Prostate Cancer at the University of Benin Teaching Hospital.

Objectives: To assess and compare the diagnostic accuracy of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and digital rectal examination (DRE) in the diagnosis of prostate cancer. Materials and Methods: It was a prospective, comparative study carried out over a period of 14 months at the University of Benin Teaching Hospital, Benin City. It involved male patients ≥50 years who presented at the urology clinic with lower urinary tract symptoms (due to prostatic disease), PSA > 4 ng/mL and or abnormal DRE findings. They had serum total PSA determined. Patients were recruited for prostate biopsy and samples sent for histopathological assessment. Histopathology was determined by a histopathologist dedicated to the study. Using a researcher-administered, structured proforma, data were collected, collated and subjected to statistical analysis for assessment and comparative analysis of the diagnostic accuracy of PSA and DRE. Results: The study involved 94 patients; they were all Nigerians. The age range of the study population was 50-85 years, with a mean age of 70.4 ± 8.6 years. Most (89.4%) of the patients were exposed to formal education. PSA of the study population ranged between 2.5 and 840 ng/mL. For patients with carcinoma of the prostate (CaP), median PSA value was 79.2 ng/mL, whereas patients with benign prostatic disease had a median PSA value of 16.0 ng/mL. The difference in median PSA value between the two groups was statistically significant (P < 0.001). In this study, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV) and diagnostic accuracy of PSA was 97.2%, 12.1%, 40.7%, 87.5% and 44.7%, respectively. However, a sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV and diagnostic accuracy of DRE was 88.9%, 70.7%, 65.3%, 91.1% and 77.7%, respectively. Combination of PSA and DRE had sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV and diagnostic accuracy of 91.7%, 91.4%, 86.8%, 94.6% and 91.5%, respectively. In this study, 36 (38.3%) patients had CaP whereas 57 (60.6%) patients had benign prostatic disease and 1 (1.1%) patient had high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia. Conclusion: The study revealed a low specificity, high sensitivity and low diagnostic accuracy of PSA in diagnosis of CaP. However, sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic accuracy of DRE were high but not sufficient in diagnosis of CaP. A combination of PSA and DRE had a higher sensitivity, specificity and diagnostic accuracy in diagnosis of prostate cancer.

Awareness and Acceptance of Digital Rectal Examination for the Clinical Evaluation of Anorectal Conditions Among the Saudi Population: A Cross-Sectional Study.

INTRODUCTION: Digital rectal examination (DRE) is an important diagnostic tool used by physicians to resolve several confusing clinical situations. The history and physical examination cannot be complete without performing a DRE. Any patient that presents with abdominal complaints (e.g., diarrhea, constipation, nausea, vomiting, abdominal or rectal pain, bleeding) needs a DRE which is important for detecting warning signs of serious conditions that require further investigation and evaluation such as malignancies. Therefore, our aim was to assess and measure the awareness of the Saudi population regarding the importance and acceptance to perform DRE. METHODS: This cross-sectional study was conducted in Riyadh, the capital city of Saudi Arabia, using an online survey between September 2022 and March 2023; the targeted participants were adults between the ages of 18 to 75. RESULTS: The study indicated that the general community awareness of DRE is low, with only 59.1% of participants having heard of DRE and 14.6% having undergone the procedure previously. The majority of individuals (60.9%) were willing to undergo DRE if a healthcare provider suggested it. Participants' knowledge of DRE's ability to detect various anorectal diseases varied. While the majority of individuals believed DRE could detect hemorrhoids, just 40.4% believed DRE could help detect colorectal cancer. Chronic constipation or diarrhea, feces-induced stretching, and prolonged sitting were the most oft-cited causes of hemorrhoids. Anemia was the most often reported consequence of hemorrhoids, followed by hypertension and diabetes. CONCLUSION: The significance of DRE as a screening tool for the early detection and prevention of anorectal problems, as well as the need for adequate care and treatment of hemorrhoids to prevent complications, are highlighted by these findings. Healthcare practitioners should actively recommend and provide information about DRE and other screening technologies, as well as address their patients' concerns and misconceptions.

Two-finger digital rectal examination for the diagnosis of anal fistula: protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

Background: Anal fistula is an anorectal infectious disease caused by a perianal abscess or perianal disease. Accurate anorectal examinations are of great significance. The two-finger digital rectal examination (TF-DRE) has been used in clinical practice, with a lack of comprehensive research on the value of the TF-DRE in the diagnosis of anal fistula. This study will compare the difference in the diagnostic value of the TF-DRE, traditional digital rectal examination (DRE), and anorectal ultrasonography in the diagnosis of anal fistula. Methods: For patients who meet the inclusion criteria, a TF-DRE will be performed to explore the number and location of the external and internal orifices, the number of fistulas, and the relationship between the fistula and the perianal sphincter. A DRE and anorectal ultrasonography will also be performed, and the same data will be recorded. To make a comparison, the final diagnosis results of the clinicians during the operation will be taken as the gold standard, the accuracy of the TF-DRE in diagnosing anal fistula will be calculated, and the significance of the TF-DRE in the preoperative diagnosis of anal fistula will be studied and analyzed. All the statistical results will be analyzed using SPSS22.0 (IBM, USA), and a P value <0.05 will be considered statistically significant. Discussion: The research protocol details the advantages of the TF-DRE compared to the DRE and anorectal ultrasonography in the diagnosis of anal fistula. This study will provide clinical evidence of the diagnostic value of the TF-DRE in the diagnosis of anal fistula. Currently, there is a lack of high-quality research using scientific methods on this innovative anorectal examination method. This study will provide rigorously designed clinical evidence on the TF-DRE. Registration: Chinese Clinical Trials Registry ChiCTR2100045450.

Are magnetic resonance imaging and targeted biopsies needed in men with serum prostate-specific antigen over 10 ng/ml and an abnormal digital rectal examination?

The European Association of Urology currently recommends the use of risk-organized models to decrease the demand of prebiopsy magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and unnecessary prostate biopsies in men with suspected prostate cancer (CaP). Low evidence suggests that men with prostate-specific antigen >10 ng/ml and an abnormal digital rectal examination (DRE) do not benefit from prebiopsy MRI and targeted biopsies. We aim to validate this low evidence in a sizable cohort and knowing how many clinically significant CaP (csCaP) would go undetected if only random biopsies were performed in these cases. We analyze a subset of 545 men with PSA >10 ng/ml and an abnormal DRE who met the previous criteria among 5,329 participants in a prospective trial in whom random biopsy was always performed and targeted biopsies of PI-RADS ≥3 lesions (10.2%). CsCaP (grade group ≥2) was detected in 370 men (67.9%), with 11 of 49 with negative MRI (22.5%) and 359 of 496 (72.4%) having PI-RADS ≥3. CsCaP was identified in random and targeted biopsies in 317 (88.7%) men, in targeted biopsies only in 23 (6.4%), and in random biopsies only in 19 (5.3%). If only random biopsies were performed in these men, 23 of overall 1,914 csCaP (1.2%) would go undetected in this population. Prebiopsy MRI can be saved in men with serum PSA >10 ng/ml and an abnormal DRE and only random biopsy performed. However, a close follow-up of men with negative random biopsy seems appropriate due to the high-risk of csCaP in these men.

Prostate-specific antigen density as the best predictor of low- to intermediate-risk prostate cancer: a cohort study.

Background: Evaluation of prostate cancer (PCa) when serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level is vaguely elevated is complicated. This is because serum PSA levels only reflect the number of prostate epithelial cells. We aimed to compare PSA and various prostate volume-related factors to determine which one can best predict PCa in patients with a PSA level of 2.5-20 ng/mL. Methods: Patients who underwent transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided prostate biopsy at the Inje University Sanggye Paik Hospital between January 2018 and July 2021 and who had a PSA level of 2.5-20 ng/mL were retrospectively identified (n=275). Among them, based on biopsy results, patients were divided into cancer group and non-cancer groups, and age, PSA, total prostate volume (TPV), peripheral zone volume (PZV), peripheral zone PSA density (PZ-PSAD), transitional zone-PSAD (TZ-PSAD), and PSAD were compared and analyzed using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) and univariate analyses. Results: The areas under ROC curves (AUCs) for age, total PSA, TPV, PZV, PZ-PSAD, TZ-PSAD, and PSAD for predicting PCa in patients with a PSA level of 2.5-20.0 ng/mL were 0.678, 0.680, 0.671, 0.639, 0.731, 0.736, and 0.764, respectively. In univariate and multivariate analysis, all categorical variables were divided based on the cut-off value and used to predict PCa. Those with a PSAD of ≥0.218 ng/mL2 were found to be at an increased risk of PCa than those with a PSAD of <0.218 ng/mL2 [odds ratio (OR) =3.51; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.306-9.415], which was the best result, followed by TZ-PSAD with a cut-off value of 0.353. At a PSAD level of 0.218 ng/mL2, 85.0% of the PCa group could avoid unnecessary biopsy and 61.4% of the non-PCa group could reduce missed diagnosis when the TRUS findings were inaccurate. Conclusions: PSAD may inform biopsy decisions as the best predictor of PCa when TRUS findings are ambiguous in patients with a PSA level of 2.5-20.0 ng/mL.

An unusual rectal foreign body: A sundried corn-stick.

Though common, the extraction of rectal foreign bodies is still a great challenge for surgeons. The foreign body's position can usually be verified by plain abdominal radiography. Given the potential of sexually transmitted disease, screening for HIV, hepatitis, and syphilis is warranted prior to intervention. The utilization and selection of surgical instruments need to be flexible, ingenious, and innovative.

To what extent are anorectal function tests comparable? A study comparing digital rectal examination, anal electromyography, 3-dimensional high-resolution anal manometry, and transperineal ultrasound.

BACKGROUND: Anorectal function tests are helpful for objective investigation of anorectal (dys)function. A variety of tests are available, but there is no recommendation when to perform which test. Furthermore, which test is the most accurate is controversial and the correlation between these tests is not very clear. The aim of our study was to examine the correlation of anal pressures and the possibility to diagnose pelvic floor dyssynergia between digital rectal examination (DRE) and several anorectal function tests. METHODS: Between January 2020 and April 2022, all men and women aged 18 to 80 years, treated at the Proctos Clinic, who were referred for pelvic floor physical therapy (PFPT) by the surgeon and underwent anorectal function tests, were included. DRE was performed to establish the anal pressure at rest and during squeeze and straining. Anorectal function tests included 3D high-resolution anal manometry (3D-HRAM), balloon expulsion test (BET), transperineal ultrasound (TPUS), and surface electromyography (s-EMG). RESULTS: A total of 50 patients, 37 (74%) females, were included. Median age was 51 years. Twenty-three (62%) females had a history of two or more vaginal deliveries. The most frequent reason for referral for PFPT was fecal incontinence in 27 (54%) patients. The assessed pressures and pelvic floor function measured with DRE by the surgeon and the pelvic floor physical therapist during rest, squeeze, and straining correlated in 78%, 78%, and 84%, respectively. Correlation between DRE and 3D-HRAM or s-EMG was better for squeeze pressures than resting pressures. The correlation between s-EMG and 3D-HRAM was better during squeeze than at rest with an agreement of 59% and 37%, respectively. CONCLUSION: DRE by an experienced investigator is of sufficient value for daily clinical practice to detect dyssynergia and to measure sphincter tone. Commonly performed anorectal function tests correlate poorly with DRE and with other anorectal function tests. When conservative treatment fails, further investigation is warranted; however, these results should be interpreted with caution. WHAT DOES THIS PAPER ADD TO THE LITERATURE?: Anorectal function tests such as the 3D high-resolution anorectal manometry, balloon expulsion test, surface electromyography, and transperineal ultrasound are all frequently performed in the diagnostic workup in patients with defecation disorders. No previous study has compared these tests regarding their outcomes, nor has the interrater agreement been measured regarding the digital rectal examination by two experienced observers. Furthermore, transperineal ultrasound is in all probability not frequently used and therefore underexposed in the diagnostic workup of patients with dyssynergic defecation.

Differentially expressed glycoproteins in pre- and post-digital rectal examination urine samples for detecting aggressive prostate cancer.

Urinary glycoproteins associated with aggressive prostate cancer (AG-PCa) were previously reported using post-digital rectal examination (DRE) urine specimens. To explore the potential of using pre-DRE urine specimens for detecting AG-PCa, we compared glycoproteins between pre- and post-DRE urine specimens, verified the previously identified post-DRE AG-PCa-associated urinary glycoproteins in pre-DRE urine specimens, and explored potential new glycoproteins for AG-PCa detection in pre-DRE urine specimens. Quantitative glycoproteomic data were acquired for 154 pre-DRE urine specimens from 41 patients with no cancer at biopsy, 48 patients with non-AG-PCa (Gleason score = 6), and 65 patients with AG-PCa (Gleason score 7 or above). Compared to glycopeptides from the post-DRE urine data, humoral immunity-related proteins were enriched in pre-DRE urine samples, whereas cell mediated immune response proteins were enriched in post-DRE urine samples. Analyses of AG-PCa-associated glycoproteins from pre-DRE urine revealed that the three urinary glycoproteins, prostate-specific antigen (PSA), prostatic acid phosphatase (ACPP), and CD97 antigen (CD97) that were previously identified in post-DRE urine samples, were also observed as AG-PCa associated glycoproteins in pre-DRE urine. In addition, we identified three new glycoproteins, fibrillin 1 (FBN1), vitronectin (VTN), and hemicentin 2 (HMCN2), to be potentially associated with AG-PCa in pre-DRE urine specimens. In summary, glycoprotein profiles differ between pre- and post-DRE urine specimens. The identified AG-PCa-associated glycoproteins may be further evaluated in large cohort of pre-DRE urine specimens for detecting clinically significant PCa.

Progress in the clinical application of prostate biopsy / 现代泌尿外科杂志

Prostate biopsy is the gold standard for the diagnosis of prostate cancer. In order to reduce misdiagnosis and complications, the method of prostate biopsy has undergone tremendous changes, and is developing to be more accurate, safe and convenient. This article reviews the progress of clinical application of prostate biopsy.

Correlation of digital rectal examination and serum prostate-specific antigen levels for detection of prostate cancer: Retrospective analysis results from a tertiary care urology center.

Objective: The objective of our study was to evaluate the detection rate of prostate cancer by digital rectal examination (DRE) and serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels followed by standard 12-core transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided prostate biopsy. Materials and Methods: After screening of patients presenting with lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) using DRE and serum PSA level, we enrolled patients for TRUS-guided 12-core prostate biopsy. Indications included PSA level ≥4 ng/ml and/or suspicious DRE findings. A retrospective analysis was done to find out the correlation between suspicious rectal examination and various serum PSA levels in detection of cancer prostate. Results: A total of 847 patients were screened for cancer prostate during our study period (May 2012-February 2020). Among them, 823 patients who underwent prostate biopsy were analyzed. Prostate cancer was detected in 330 cases (40.09%). Mean age of patient (years) with and without prostate cancer was 66.25 ± 9.45 and 64.3 ± 8.96 years, respectively. Median value of serum PSA in patients positive for cancer was 33 ± 260 ng/ml compared to patients without cancer, who had a median value of 9 ± 64 ng/ml (P-value of <0.0001). The detection rate of cancer based on suspicious DRE findings irrespective of PSA was 52.18% (251/481), compared to 45.46% (311/684) using a PSA cut-off of ≥4.0 ng/ml alone. Among 330 patients with positive biopsy, 19 (5.75%) had a PSA level <4 ng/ml and they were identified based on suspicious DRE alone. Conclusion: Suspicious DRE was significantly associated with detection of prostate cancer across all PSA levels. Patients with PSA <4 can harbor prostate malignancy and such cases can be detected by use of DRE in screening of all patients with LUTS.