Comparison of Pain Levels in Fusion Prostate Biopsy and Standard TRUS-Guided Biopsy

NCT ID: NCT03859804

Last Updated: 2019-03-01

Study Results

Results pending

The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

COMPLETED

Clinical Phase

NA

Total Enrollment

252 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2016-12-01

Study Completion Date

2019-02-01

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

The aim of this study was to compare the pain levels in transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided standard 12-core prostate biopsy (SPB) and multiparametric prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MpMRI)-guided fusion prostate biopsy (FPB).

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

The study included patients that underwent prostate biopsy under local anesthesia (intrarectal 2% lidocaine gel + periprostatic nerve block) due to suspected prostate cancer. Patients detected with a Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System score (PIRADS) ≥3 lesion on MpMRI underwent MpMRI-guided FPB (Group I) and the patients who had no suspected lesions or had a PI-RADS \<3 lesion on MpMRI underwent TRUS-guided SPB (Group II). Pain assessment was performed using Visual Analog Scale (VAS) 5 min after the procedure. Following the procedure, the patients were asked to indicate the most painful biopsy step among the three steps (1: insertion of the probe into the rectum, 2: probe manipulation, 3: the piercing of the biopsy needle).

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Pain Due to Certain Specified Procedures Prostate Cancer Biopsy

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Allocation Method

NON_RANDOMIZED

Intervention Model

PARALLEL

pain levels after standard transrectal prostate 12 core biopsy and MRI -US fusion prostate biopsy were detected and compared in 2 groups.
Primary Study Purpose

SUPPORTIVE_CARE

Blinding Strategy

NONE

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

Group 1

In Group 1, Patients detected with a PI-RADS (Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System) ≥3 lesion on MpMRI underwent MpMRI-guided MRI- US fusion prostate biopsy. In this fusion biopsy, 12 core standard biopsy and 2-4 cores of biopsies from lesions defined on multiparametric prostate MRI

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

MRI- US fusion prostate biopsy (FPB)

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

FPB was performed by obtaining 10-12 core samples in each patient, followed by the acquisition of 2-4 core samples for each suspected lesion detected on MpMRI (combined biopsy)

Group 2

In Group 2, patients who had no suspected lesions or had a PI-RADS \<3 lesion on MpMRI underwent Transrectal ultrasound guided 12 core prostate biopsy (SPB).

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

Standard transrectal 12 core biopsy

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

TRUS-guided SPB was performed by obtaining 12 core samples in each patient. 6 cores from left and right. the cores labeled as, apex, mid, base, apex far lateral, mid far lateral and base far lateral

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

Standard transrectal 12 core biopsy

TRUS-guided SPB was performed by obtaining 12 core samples in each patient. 6 cores from left and right. the cores labeled as, apex, mid, base, apex far lateral, mid far lateral and base far lateral

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

MRI- US fusion prostate biopsy (FPB)

FPB was performed by obtaining 10-12 core samples in each patient, followed by the acquisition of 2-4 core samples for each suspected lesion detected on MpMRI (combined biopsy)

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

Other Intervention Names

Discover alternative or legacy names that may be used to describe the listed interventions across different sources.

Group 2 Group 1

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

* Elevated blood prostate specific antigen (PSA) levels according to patients age. PSA \>2ng/ml for whom aged between 50-60, and PSA \>4ng/ml for whom were above 60 years old
* Having suspicious digital rectal examination
* having multi-parametric prostate MRI before prostate biopsy
* Having MRI defined lesions which were PIRADS - 3 -4-5

Exclusion Criteria

* PSA \> 50 ng/ml
* previous negative biopsy
* neurological disorders that could affect the pain level such as paraplegia or hemiplegia, analgesics use for any reason on the day of or the day before the procedure,
* patients underwent biopsy under general anesthesia,
* having such diseases as anal fissure or hemorrhoidal disease that could alter the pain threshold
Minimum Eligible Age

50 Years

Maximum Eligible Age

75 Years

Eligible Sex

MALE

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

TC Erciyes University

OTHER

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.

Abdullah Demirtas

Abdullah Demirtas, Md, Assoc. Prof.

Responsibility Role PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Principal Investigators

Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.

Abdullah T Demirtaş, MD

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Erciyes University Faculty of Medicine Department of Urolgoy

Locations

Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.

Department of Urology, Ercieys University, Faculty Of Medicine,

Kayseri, , Turkey (Türkiye)

Site Status

Countries

Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.

Turkey (Türkiye)

References

Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.

Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Dikshit R, Eser S, Mathers C, Rebelo M, Parkin DM, Forman D, Bray F. Cancer incidence and mortality worldwide: sources, methods and major patterns in GLOBOCAN 2012. Int J Cancer. 2015 Mar 1;136(5):E359-86. doi: 10.1002/ijc.29210. Epub 2014 Oct 9.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 25220842 (View on PubMed)

Siddiqui MM, Rais-Bahrami S, Turkbey B, George AK, Rothwax J, Shakir N, Okoro C, Raskolnikov D, Parnes HL, Linehan WM, Merino MJ, Simon RM, Choyke PL, Wood BJ, Pinto PA. Comparison of MR/ultrasound fusion-guided biopsy with ultrasound-guided biopsy for the diagnosis of prostate cancer. JAMA. 2015 Jan 27;313(4):390-7. doi: 10.1001/jama.2014.17942.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 25626035 (View on PubMed)

Gayet M, van der Aa A, Beerlage HP, Schrier BP, Mulders PF, Wijkstra H. The value of magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasonography (MRI/US)-fusion biopsy platforms in prostate cancer detection: a systematic review. BJU Int. 2016 Mar;117(3):392-400. doi: 10.1111/bju.13247. Epub 2015 Aug 28.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 26237632 (View on PubMed)

Hwang SI, Lee HJ, Lee SE, Hong SK, Byun SS, Lee SC, Choe G. Value of MR-US fusion in guidance of repeated prostate biopsy in men with PSA < 10 ng/mL. Clin Imaging. 2019 Jan-Feb;53:1-5. doi: 10.1016/j.clinimag.2018.09.012. Epub 2018 Sep 22.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 30265884 (View on PubMed)

Mannaerts CK, Kajtazovic A, Lodeizen OAP, Gayet M, Engelbrecht MRW, Jager GJ, Wijkstra H, de Reijke TM, Beerlage HP. The added value of systematic biopsy in men with suspicion of prostate cancer undergoing multiparametric MRI-targeted biopsy. Urol Oncol. 2019 May;37(5):298.e1-298.e9. doi: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2019.01.005. Epub 2019 Jan 17.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 30660493 (View on PubMed)

Luan Y, Huang TB, Gu X, Zhou GC, Lu SM, Tao HZ, Liu BD, Ding XF. Effect of prostate volume on the peripheral nerve block anesthesia in the prostate biopsy: A strobe-compliant study. Medicine (Baltimore). 2016 Jul;95(28):e4184. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000004184.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 27428215 (View on PubMed)

Fourcade A, Payrard C, Tissot V, Perrouin-Verbe MA, Demany N, Serey-Effeil S, Callerot P, Coquet JB, Doucet L, Deruelle C, Joulin V, Nonent M, Fournier G, Valeri A. The combination of targeted and systematic prostate biopsies is the best protocol for the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer. Scand J Urol. 2018 Jun;52(3):174-179. doi: 10.1080/21681805.2018.1438509. Epub 2018 Feb 20.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 29463177 (View on PubMed)

Autorino R, De Sio M, Di Lorenzo G, Damiano R, Perdona S, Cindolo L, D'Armiento M. How to decrease pain during transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy: a look at the literature. J Urol. 2005 Dec;174(6):2091-7. doi: 10.1097/01.ju.0000181212.51025.06.

Reference Type RESULT
PMID: 16280735 (View on PubMed)

Mazdak H, Abtahi AM, Momeni F, Izadpanahi MH. A comparison of pain control and complications using three different ways of anesthesia in patients undergoing transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy. J Res Med Sci. 2018 Feb 20;23:17. doi: 10.4103/jrms.JRMS_639_17. eCollection 2018.

Reference Type RESULT
PMID: 29531569 (View on PubMed)

Wang N, Fu Y, Ma H, Wang J, Gao Y. Advantages of caudal block over intrarectal local anesthesia plus periprostatic nerve block for transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy. Pak J Med Sci. 2016 Jul-Aug;32(4):978-82. doi: 10.12669/pjms.324.9823.

Reference Type RESULT
PMID: 27648052 (View on PubMed)

Yang Y, Liu Z, Wei Q, Cao D, Yang L, Zhu Y, Wei X, Tang Z, Liu L, Han P. The Efficiency and Safety of Intrarectal Topical Anesthesia for Transrectal Ultrasound-Guided Prostate Biopsy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Urol Int. 2017;99(4):373-383. doi: 10.1159/000481830. Epub 2017 Oct 30.

Reference Type RESULT
PMID: 29084411 (View on PubMed)

Alabi TO, Tijani KH, Adeyomoye AA, Jeje EA, Anunobi CC, Ogunjimi MA, Ojewola RW, Akanmu ON, Oliyide AE, Orakwe DE. Combined intrarectal lidocaine gel and periprostatic nerve block: A 'balanced' anaesthesia for transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy? Niger Postgrad Med J. 2018 Oct-Dec;25(4):252-256. doi: 10.4103/npmj.npmj_145_18.

Reference Type RESULT
PMID: 30588947 (View on PubMed)

Collins GN, Lloyd SN, Hehir M, McKelvie GB. Multiple transrectal ultrasound-guided prostatic biopsies--true morbidity and patient acceptance. Br J Urol. 1993 Apr;71(4):460-3. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410x.1993.tb15993.x.

Reference Type RESULT
PMID: 8499991 (View on PubMed)

Hollingsworth JM, Miller DC, Wei JT. Local anesthesia in transrectal prostate biopsy. Urology. 2006 Jun;67(6):1283-4. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2005.12.016.

Reference Type RESULT
PMID: 16765193 (View on PubMed)

Robins D, Lipsky M, RoyChoudry A, Wenske S. Assessment of Discomfort and Pain in Patients Undergoing Fusion Magnetic Resonance Imaging-guided vs TRUS-guided Prostate Biopsy. Urology. 2018 Jun;116:30-34. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2018.02.029. Epub 2018 Mar 12.

Reference Type RESULT
PMID: 29545039 (View on PubMed)

Arsov C, Rabenalt R, Quentin M, Hiester A, Blondin D, Albers P, Antoch G, Schimmoller L. Comparison of patient comfort between MR-guided in-bore and MRI/ultrasound fusion-guided prostate biopsies within a prospective randomized trial. World J Urol. 2016 Feb;34(2):215-20. doi: 10.1007/s00345-015-1612-6. Epub 2015 Jun 9.

Reference Type RESULT
PMID: 26055645 (View on PubMed)

Fabiani A, Servi L, Filosa A, Fioretti F, Maurelli V, Tombolini F, Talle M, Mammana G. May ultrasound probe size influence pain perception of needle piercing during transrectal prostate biopsy? A prospective evaluation. Arch Ital Urol Androl. 2016 Oct 5;88(3):223-227. doi: 10.4081/aiua.2016.3.223.

Reference Type RESULT
PMID: 27711100 (View on PubMed)

Yan P, Wang XY, Huang W, Zhang Y. Local anesthesia for pain control during transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Pain Res. 2016 Oct 11;9:787-796. doi: 10.2147/JPR.S117451. eCollection 2016.

Reference Type RESULT
PMID: 27785093 (View on PubMed)

Urabe F, Kimura T, Shimomura T, Onuma H, Yamamoto T, Sasaki H, Miki J, Kuruma H, Miki K, Egawa S. Prospective comparison of the efficacy of caudal versus periprostatic nerve block, both with intrarectal local anesthesia, during transrectal ultrasonography-guided prostatic needle biopsy. Scand J Urol. 2017 Aug;51(4):245-250. doi: 10.1080/21681805.2017.1318299. Epub 2017 Apr 26.

Reference Type RESULT
PMID: 28443752 (View on PubMed)

Valdez-Flores RA, Campos-Salcedo JG, Torres-Gomez JJ, Sedano-Lozano A, Pares-Hipolito J, Shelton LM, Canizalez-Roman A, Valdez-Flores MA. Prospective comparison among three intrarectal anesthetic treatments combined with periprostatic nerve block during transrectal ultrasonography-guided prostate biopsy. World J Urol. 2018 Feb;36(2):193-199. doi: 10.1007/s00345-017-2136-z. Epub 2017 Nov 23.

Reference Type RESULT
PMID: 29170792 (View on PubMed)

Gomez-Gomez E, Ramirez M, Gomez-Ferrer A, Rubio-Briones J, Iborra I, J Carrasco-Valiente, Campos JP, Ruiz-Garcia J, Requena-Tapia MJ, Solsona E. Assessment and clinical factors associated with pain in patients undergoing transrectal prostate biopsy. Actas Urol Esp. 2015 Sep;39(7):414-9. doi: 10.1016/j.acuro.2015.01.007. Epub 2015 Mar 6. English, Spanish.

Reference Type RESULT
PMID: 25745791 (View on PubMed)

Bastide C, Lechevallier E, Eghazarian C, Ortega JC, Coulange C. Tolerance of pain during transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy of the prostate: risk factors. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2003;6(3):239-41. doi: 10.1038/sj.pcan.4500664.

Reference Type RESULT
PMID: 12970728 (View on PubMed)

Djavan B, Waldert M, Zlotta A, Dobronski P, Seitz C, Remzi M, Borkowski A, Schulman C, Marberger M. Safety and morbidity of first and repeat transrectal ultrasound guided prostate needle biopsies: results of a prospective European prostate cancer detection study. J Urol. 2001 Sep;166(3):856-60.

Reference Type RESULT
PMID: 11490233 (View on PubMed)

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

2014/508

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.

Registry of MIUS for Benign Prostatic Obstruction
NCT07159165 ENROLLING_BY_INVITATION