MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2164840979 · doi:10.5489/cuaj.11169

Effect of needle size on cancer detection, pain, bleeding and infection in TRUS-guided prostate biopsies: a prospective trial

2012· article· en· W2164840979 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Michael McCormack, Alain Duclos, Mathieu Latour, Marie McCormack, Daniel Liberman, Orchidée Djahangirian, Josette Bergeron, Luc Valiquette, Kevin C. Zorn

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Urological Association Journal · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalHEC MontréalHôpital Saint-Luc
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineProstate cancerProstateBiopsyProstate biopsyRadiologyProspective cohort studySurgeryUrologyCancerInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided prostate biopsies using 18G calibre needles are widely used; most often 12-core tissue samples of the peripheral zone are obtained. Although the diagnostic yield of prostate biopsies is fair, there is still a potential for false negative results, which necessitates repeat biopsies. In an effort to improve the accuracy of prostate biopsies, different sampling schemes have been developed. One strategy has been to increase the number of core biopsies performed on each patient. Another strategy has been to improve the reliability of prostate biopsies using larger calibre needles, thereby increasing the amount of tissue obtained for each core biopsy. METHODS: After approval by our institutional review board, we prospectively compared two biopsy needle sizes (18G vs. 16G) in relation to prostate cancer diagnosis, pain, bleeding and infection rates on 105 patients. Each patient underwent 6 TRUS-guided prostate biopsies with the standard 18G needle and 6 other biopsies with the experimental 16G needle. To evaluate possible complications related to the use of a larger 16G needle in the experimental group, we compared pain, bleeding and infection rates with a control group of 100 patients who underwent 12 biopsies with a single 18G needle (18G group). Pain, bleeding assessment and infection events were evaluated using patient questionnaires and telephone interviews. RESULTS: TRUS-guided prostate biopsies using 16G calibre needles did not increase cancer detection or non-malignant pathology rate, including prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (PIN) and atypical small acinar proliferatio (ASAP). Pain, bleeding and infectious complications were similar in both groups. Infection was defined as temperature above 38°C occurring within 48 hours after the procedure. We identified 4 patients with post-biopsy fever in the experimental (16/18G) group and 4 other patients in the (18G) control group. The post-biopsy infection rate is higher than reported just a few years ago and indicates that quinolone resistant Escherichia coli seems to be more prevalent in our urban setting than previously suspected. Limitations to our study include small group numbers. CONCLUSION: Larger 16G needles appear to be safe for TRUS-guided prostate biopsies. Further study in a larger, multi-institutional, prospective, randomized manner with 16G needles is warranted to assess the theoretical benefit of larger core biopsies in prostate cancer detection.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.688

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.257 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations26
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Urological Association JournalSame topicProstate Cancer Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207