The Biopsychosocial Burden of Prostate Biopsy at the Time of Its Indication, Procedure, and Pathological Report

Walker W Laranja, Brunno C F Sanches, Brunno R I Voris, João C C Alonso, Fabiano A Simões, Ronald F Rejowski, Leonardo O Reis, Walker W Laranja, Brunno C F Sanches, Brunno R I Voris, João C C Alonso, Fabiano A Simões, Ronald F Rejowski, Leonardo O Reis

Abstract

Purpose: To explore the burden of prostate biopsy at the time of its indication, procedure, and pathological report in the prostate cancer-screening scenario that is neglected and underestimated in the literature.

Methods: Prostate biopsy was offered to 47 consecutive patients with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) over 4 ng/dl or suspicious digital rectal examination (DRE) of whom 16 had undergone a biopsy. Comprehensive validated questionnaires at Time 0 (prebiopsy), Time 1 (before diagnosis, 20 days after biopsy), and Time 2 (after diagnosis, 40 days after biopsy) accessed patients' erectile (IIEF-5) and voiding (IPSS) functions, Beck scales measured anxiety (BAI), hopelessness (BHS), and depression (BDI), added to the emotional thermometers including five visual analog scales for distress, anxiety, depression, anger, and need for help. The Mann-Whitney or Friedman tests were obtained among times and studied variables.

Results: Prostate biopsy did not significantly impact patients' erectile and voiding functions while a higher Beck anxiety index (BAI) was observed at Time 0 (6.89 ± 6.33) compared to Time 1 (4.83 ± 2.87), p=0.0214, and to Time 2 (4.22 ± 4.98), p=0.0178. At Time 0, patients that experienced a previous biopsy presented higher distress (3.1 ± 3.0 vs. 1.6 ± 2.3), p=0.043, and emotional suffering thermometer scores (2.3 ± 3.3 vs. 0.9 ± 2.4) compared to those undergoing the first biopsy, p=0.036. At Time 2, patients with positive biopsies compared with those with negative ones showed no significant difference in outcome scores. The sample power was >90%.

Conclusions: To be considered in patients' counseling and care, the current study supports the hypothesis that the peak burden of prostate biopsy occurs at the time of its indication and might be higher for those experiencing rebiopsy, significantly impacting patients' psychosocial domains.

Trial approval: This trial is registered under number NCT03783741.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Study flowchart.

References

    1. Naccarato A. M. E. P., Reis L. O., Matheus W. E., Ferreira U., Denardi F. Barriers to prostate cancer screening: psychological aspects and descriptive variables - Is there a correlation? The Aging Male. 2011;14(1):66–71. doi: 10.3109/13685538.2010.522277.
    1. Brasil. Ministério da Saúde. Instituto Nacional do Câncer. Estimativa de câncer no Brasil. Disponível em: , 2014.
    1. Reis L. O., Sanches B. C. F., de Mendonça G. B., et al. Gleason underestimation is predicted by prostate biopsy core length. World Journal of Urology. 2015;33(6):821–826. doi: 10.1007/s00345-014-1371-9.
    1. Moraes MC. Introdução a Psiconcologia. São Paulo, Brazil: Livro Pleno; 1994. O paciente oncológico, o psicólogo e o hospital; pp. 57–63.
    1. Saini A., Berruti A., Cracco C., et al. Psychological distress in men with prostate cancer receiving adjuvant androgen-deprivation therapy. Urologic Oncology: Seminars and Original Investigations. 2013;31(3):352–358. doi: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2011.02.005.
    1. Oliveira Reis L., Deeke Sasse A., Matheus W. E., et al. Cáncer de próstata: práctica clínica basada en la evidencia. Actas Urológicas Españolas. 2009;33(4):344–350. doi: 10.4321/S0210-48062009000400002.
    1. Prcic A., Begic E., Hiros M. Actual contribution of free to total psa ratio in prostate diseases differentiation. Medical archives (Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina) 2016;70(4):288–292.
    1. Conover W. J. Practical Nonparametric Statistics. 3rd. John Wiley & Sons Inc. Nova Iorque; 1999.
    1. Milliken G. A., Johnson D. E. Analysis of Messy Data. Volume I: Designed Experiments. New York, NY, USA: Van Nostrand Reinhold Company; 1984.
    1. Montgomery Douglas C. Design and Analysis of Experiments. 3rd. New York, NY, USA: John Wiley & Sons; 1991.
    1. De Marco M. A. Do modelo biomédico ao modelo biopsicossocial: um projeto de educação permanente. Revista Brasileira de Educação Médica. 2006;30(1):60–72. doi: 10.1590/S0100-55022006000100010.
    1. Helman C. G. Cultura, Saúde e Doença/ Trad. Ane Rose Bolnet – 5. Porto Alegre, Brazil: Artmed; 2009.
    1. Wade J., Rosario D. J., Macefield R. C., et al. Psychological impact of prostate biopsy: Physical symptoms, anxiety, and depression. Journal of Clinical Oncology. 2013;31(33):4235–4241. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2012.45.4801.
    1. de Cerqueira M. A., Laranja W. W., Sanches B. C. F., Monti C. R., Reis L. O. Burden of focal cryoablation versus brachytherapy versus active surveillance in the treatment of very low-risk prostate cancer: A preliminary head-to-head comprehensive assessment. European Journal of Cancer Care. 2015;24(6):929–937. doi: 10.1111/ecc.12307.
    1. Zamuner M., Falcone C. E., Amstalden Neto A., et al. Impact of benign prostatic hyperplasia pharmacological treatment on transrectal prostate biopsy adverse effects. Advances in Urology. 2014;2014271304
    1. Klein T., Palisaar R. J., Holz A., Brock M., Noldus J., Hinkel A. The impact of prostate biopsy and periprostatic nerve block on erectile and voiding function: A prospective study. The Journal of Urology. 2010;184(4):1447–1452. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2010.06.021.
    1. Helfand B. T., Glaser A. P., Rimar K., et al. Prostate cancer diagnosis is associated with an increased risk of erectile dysfunction after prostate biopsy. BJU International. 2013;111(1):38–43. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2012.11268.x.
    1. Zisman A., Leibovici D., Kleinmann J., Siegel Y. I., Lindner A. The impact of prostate biopsy on patient well-being: A prospective study of pain, anxiety and erectile dysfunction. The Journal of Urology. 2001;165(2):445–454. doi: 10.1097/00005392-200102000-00023.
    1. Chrisofos M., Papatsoris A. G., Dellis A., Varkarakis I. M., Skolarikos A., Deliveliotis C. Can prostate biopsies affect erectile function? Andrologia. 2006;38(3):79–83. doi: 10.1111/j.1439-0272.2006.00714.x.
    1. Laranja WW. Campinas, SP: [s.n.]: Surgical Physiopathology, University of Campinas, Unicamp; 2016. Biopsychosocial impact of prostate biopsy a prospective study.

Source: PubMed

Sponsorzy i współpracownicy

Warunki medyczne

Interwencje lekowe

3
Subskrybuj