RISS 학술연구정보서비스

검색
다국어 입력

http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.

변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.

예시)
  • 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
  • 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
닫기
    인기검색어 순위 펼치기

    RISS 인기검색어

      KCI등재 SCOPUS SCIE

      경직장초음파 전립선침생검: 시술 전 관장의 유효성 = Transrectal Needle Biopsy of the Prostate: The Efficacy of a Pre-biopsy Enema

      한글로보기

      https://www.riss.kr/link?id=A104588775

      • 0

        상세조회
      • 0

        다운로드
      서지정보 열기
      • 내보내기
      • 내책장담기
      • 공유하기
      • 오류접수

      부가정보

      다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

      Purpose: There are numerous biopsy protocols that have been described in the clinical literature. We especially assess the role of the use of an enema before a transrectal prostate biopsy by comparing the post biopsy- infectious complications rate. Ma...

      Purpose: There are numerous biopsy protocols that have been described in the clinical literature. We especially assess the role of the use of an enema before a transrectal prostate biopsy by comparing the post biopsy- infectious complications rate.
      Materials and Methods: From January 2007 to August 2007 we retrospectively evaluated 302 men who underwent transrectal needle biopsy of the prostate according to the inclusion criteria. Patients in group 1(121 patients) did not receive an enema and were given oral ciprofloxacin(500 mg) for 3 days. Those in group 2(181 patients) received an enema before the biopsy and were also administered intravenous ciprofloxacin(400mg) and an additional oral form(500mg) for five days. Only complications related to infection were evaluated, that is, fever and chills with systemic inflammatory symptoms, within two weeks after the biopsy.
      Results: Patients demographics, such as age and prostate size did not differ between the two groups(p>0.05), but the level of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) in group 2 was significantly higher than in group 1 (12.70ng/ml versus 28.88ng/ml, p<0.05). The cancer detection rate was 36.1%(109/ 302) overall and there was no significant difference between the two groups(32.2% versus 38.7%, p>0.05). The infectious complications rate was 2.6%(8/302) overall and did not differ significantly between the two groups(2.5% versus 2.8%, p>0.05). Especially for group 2 patients, there were two cases of bacteremia and Escherichia coli was reported as the pathogen.
      Conclusions: Our findings suggest that the use of a pre-biopsy enema shows no significant benefit given the considerations of infectious complications rate, and the patient quality of life. (Korean J Urol 2008;49:248-251)

      더보기

      다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

      Purpose: There are numerous biopsy protocols that have been described in the clinical literature. We especially assess the role of the use of an enema before a transrectal prostate biopsy by comparing the post biopsy- infectious complications rate. M...

      Purpose: There are numerous biopsy protocols that have been described in the clinical literature. We especially assess the role of the use of an enema before a transrectal prostate biopsy by comparing the post biopsy- infectious complications rate.
      Materials and Methods: From January 2007 to August 2007 we retrospectively evaluated 302 men who underwent transrectal needle biopsy of the prostate according to the inclusion criteria. Patients in group 1(121 patients) did not receive an enema and were given oral ciprofloxacin(500 mg) for 3 days. Those in group 2(181 patients) received an enema before the biopsy and were also administered intravenous ciprofloxacin(400mg) and an additional oral form(500mg) for five days. Only complications related to infection were evaluated, that is, fever and chills with systemic inflammatory symptoms, within two weeks after the biopsy.
      Results: Patients demographics, such as age and prostate size did not differ between the two groups(p>0.05), but the level of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) in group 2 was significantly higher than in group 1 (12.70ng/ml versus 28.88ng/ml, p<0.05). The cancer detection rate was 36.1%(109/ 302) overall and there was no significant difference between the two groups(32.2% versus 38.7%, p>0.05). The infectious complications rate was 2.6%(8/302) overall and did not differ significantly between the two groups(2.5% versus 2.8%, p>0.05). Especially for group 2 patients, there were two cases of bacteremia and Escherichia coli was reported as the pathogen.
      Conclusions: Our findings suggest that the use of a pre-biopsy enema shows no significant benefit given the considerations of infectious complications rate, and the patient quality of life. (Korean J Urol 2008;49:248-251)

      더보기

      참고문헌 (Reference)

      1 Ramey JR, "Ultrasonography and biopsy of the prostate" Campbell-Walsh urology. 9th ed 2883-2895, 2007

      2 Carey JM, "Transrectal ultrasound guided biopsy of the prostate. Do enemas decrease clinically significant complications?" 166 : 82-85, 2001

      3 Kim TB, "The effectiveness of 12 core biopsy protocol according to prostate-specific antigen(PSA) level and prostate v" 47 : 1166-1171, 2006

      4 Vallancien G, "Systematic prostatic biopsies in 100 men with no suspicion of cancer on digital rectal examination" 146 : 1308-1312, 1991

      5 Griffith BC, "Single dose levofloxacin prophylaxis for prostate biopsy in patients at low risk" 168 : 1021-1023, 2002

      6 Djavan B, "Safety and morbidity of first and repeat transrectal ultrasound guided prostate needle biopsies: results of a prospective European prostate cancer detection study" 166 : 856-860, 2001

      7 Rodriguez LV, "Risks and complications of transrectal ultrasound guided prostate needle biopsy: a prospective study and review of the literature" 160 : 2115-2120, 1998

      8 Desmond PM, "Morbidity with contemporary prostate biopsy" 150 : 1425-1426, 1993

      9 Tal R, "Empirical management of urinary tract infections complicating transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy" 169 : 1762-1765, 2003

      10 Byun SS, "Effect of periprostatic nerve blockade for transrectal ultrasound guided biopsy of the prostate" 45 : 663-666, 2004

      1 Ramey JR, "Ultrasonography and biopsy of the prostate" Campbell-Walsh urology. 9th ed 2883-2895, 2007

      2 Carey JM, "Transrectal ultrasound guided biopsy of the prostate. Do enemas decrease clinically significant complications?" 166 : 82-85, 2001

      3 Kim TB, "The effectiveness of 12 core biopsy protocol according to prostate-specific antigen(PSA) level and prostate v" 47 : 1166-1171, 2006

      4 Vallancien G, "Systematic prostatic biopsies in 100 men with no suspicion of cancer on digital rectal examination" 146 : 1308-1312, 1991

      5 Griffith BC, "Single dose levofloxacin prophylaxis for prostate biopsy in patients at low risk" 168 : 1021-1023, 2002

      6 Djavan B, "Safety and morbidity of first and repeat transrectal ultrasound guided prostate needle biopsies: results of a prospective European prostate cancer detection study" 166 : 856-860, 2001

      7 Rodriguez LV, "Risks and complications of transrectal ultrasound guided prostate needle biopsy: a prospective study and review of the literature" 160 : 2115-2120, 1998

      8 Desmond PM, "Morbidity with contemporary prostate biopsy" 150 : 1425-1426, 1993

      9 Tal R, "Empirical management of urinary tract infections complicating transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy" 169 : 1762-1765, 2003

      10 Byun SS, "Effect of periprostatic nerve blockade for transrectal ultrasound guided biopsy of the prostate" 45 : 663-666, 2004

      11 Carter HB, "Diagnosis and staging of prostate cancer" Campbell-Walsh urology. 9th ed. 2912-2932, 2007

      12 Rietbergen JB, "Complications of transrectal ultrasound guided systematic sextant biopsies of the prostate: evaluation of complication rates and risk factors within a population-based screening program" 49 : 875-880, 1997

      13 Hwang KH, "Complications and success rate of transrectal systematic sextant biopsy of the prostate under the finger guidance" 36 : 1231-1237, 1995

      14 Raaijamakers R, "Complication rates and risk factors of 5802 transrectal ultrasound-guided sextant biopsies of the prostate within a population-based screening program" 60 : 826-830, 2002

      15 Lindert KA, "Bacteremia and bacteriuria after transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy" 164 : 76-80, 2000

      16 Cormio L, "Antimicrobial prophylaxis for transrectal prostatic biosy: a prospective study of ciprofloxacin vs piperacillin/tazobactam" 90 : 700-702, 2002

      17 Sieber PR, "Antibiotic prophylaxis in ultrasound guided transrectal prostate biopsy" 157 : 2199-2200, 1997

      18 Aron M, "Antibiotic prophylaxis for transrectal needle biopsy of the prostate: a randomized controlled study" 85 : 682-685, 2000

      19 Brown RW, "Alford RH. Bacteremia and bacteriuria after transrectal prostatic biopsy" 18 : 145-148, 1981

      더보기

      동일학술지(권/호) 다른 논문

      동일학술지 더보기

      더보기

      분석정보

      View

      상세정보조회

      0

      Usage

      원문다운로드

      0

      대출신청

      0

      복사신청

      0

      EDDS신청

      0

      동일 주제 내 활용도 TOP

      더보기

      주제

      연도별 연구동향

      연도별 활용동향

      연관논문

      연구자 네트워크맵

      공동연구자 (7)

      유사연구자 (20) 활용도상위20명

      인용정보 인용지수 설명보기

      학술지 이력

      학술지 이력
      연월일 이력구분 이력상세 등재구분
      2023 평가예정 해외DB학술지평가 신청대상 (해외등재 학술지 평가)
      2020-01-01 평가 등재학술지 유지 (해외등재 학술지 평가) KCI등재
      2019-03-12 학회명변경 한글명 : 대한비뇨기과학회 -> 대한비뇨의학회 KCI등재
      2016-03-04 학술지명변경 외국어명 : 미등록 -> Investigative and Clinical Urology KCI등재
      2016-01-15 학술지명변경 한글명 : Korean Journal of Urology -> Investigative and Clinical Urology KCI등재
      2011-01-01 평가 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
      2009-02-21 학술지명변경 한글명 : 대한비뇨기과학회지 -> Korean Journal of Urology
      외국어명 : The Korean Journal of Urology -> 미등록
      KCI등재
      2009-01-01 평가 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
      2007-01-01 평가 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
      2005-01-01 평가 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
      2002-01-01 평가 등재학술지 선정 (등재후보2차) KCI등재
      1999-07-01 평가 등재후보학술지 선정 (신규평가) KCI등재후보
      더보기

      학술지 인용정보

      학술지 인용정보
      기준연도 WOS-KCI 통합IF(2년) KCIF(2년) KCIF(3년)
      2016 0.14 0.14 0.13
      KCIF(4년) KCIF(5년) 중심성지수(3년) 즉시성지수
      0.13 0.12 0.314 0.23
      더보기

      이 자료와 함께 이용한 RISS 자료

      나만을 위한 추천자료

      해외이동버튼