Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Bert Vorstman MD's avatar

No mas, no mas por favor!

The ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy whether trans-rectal or trans-perineal and whether asleep or not, is an embarrassingly unscientific test. The 12-core test samples blindly and randomly about 0.1 percent of the prostate - when you add up the volumes of those 12 cores and measure it against the volume of your prostate. That leaves one totally ignorant of what is going on in the 99.9 percent rest of the prostate. A horrible sampling error rate. How ludicrous is that? If there is a benefit to the perineal route for the biopsy it's the fact that there are fewer septic (including deaths) and bleeding complications. All in all, the perineal biopsy is like putting lipstick on a pig - the ultrasound-guided biopsy (whether trans-rectal or perineal and whether asleep or not) is still a pig. This so-called test needs to be thrown out. The best way to detect potentially lethal high-grade disease (and ignore bogus disease) is with an MRI-guided biopsy by an expert - and then get a second opinion on the biopsy results.

Expand full comment
Tim Shreve's avatar

An update on my own experience: My Trans-Perineal was done under general anesthesia; as it was a "Fusion" biopsy. This to make sure to accurately sample the area found on the annual MRI. I.E. no moving around and disturbing the process by the patient (me).

Additional data-point: Aetna Medicare Advantage plan still calls it "experimental" so the urologist fee was not covered. But, the rest of the hospital/anesthesiologist/etc. was covered.

Me thinks, another case of urologists (the ones at the insurance company) covering the general business practices of the majority of their fellow practicing urologists.

---I'm still glad I opted for Trans-Perineal. Got good data and no infection. A completely different experience from the TR biopsy.

Expand full comment
6 more comments...

No posts