title: A comparison of complications between ultrasound-guided prostate brachytherapy and open prostate brachytherapy.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  Prostate brachytherapy has reemerged during the 1990s as a treatment for clinically localized prostate cancer. The renewed popularity of prostate brachytherapy is largely due to the use of transrectal ultrasound of the prostate, which allows for more accurate isotope placement within the prostate when compared to the open approach. The present study investigates whether this improved cancer control is at the expense of increased morbidity by comparing the morbidity after transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate brachytherapy to the morbidity after prostate brachytherapy performed via an open approach.
  
  
  METHODS
  All men in the Medicare population who underwent prostate brachytherapy in the year 1991 were identified. These men were further stratified into those men who underwent prostate brachytherapy via an open approach and the men who underwent prostate brachytherapy with ultrasound guidance. All subsequent inpatient, outpatient, and physician (Part B) Medicare claims for these men from the years 1991-1993 were then analyzed to determine outcomes.
  
  
  RESULTS
  In the year 1991, 2124 men in the Medicare population underwent prostate brachytherapy. An open approach was used in 715 men (33.7%), and ultrasound guidance was used in 1409 men (66.3%). Mean age for both cohorts was 73.7 years with a range of 50.7-92.8 years for the ultrasound group and 60.6-92. 1 years for the open group. A surgical procedure for the relief of bladder outlet obstruction was performed in 122 men (8.6%) in the ultrasound group and in 54 men (7.6%) in the open group. An artificial urinary sphincter was placed in 2 men (0.14%) in the ultrasound group and in 2 men (0.28%) in the open group. A penile prosthesis was implanted in 10 men (0.71%) in the ultrasound group and in 4 men (0.56%) in the open group. A diagnosis code for urinary incontinence was carried by 95 men (6.7%) in the ultrasound group and by 45 men (6.3%) in the open group. A diagnosis code for erectile dysfunction was carried by 90 men (6.3%) in the ultrasound group and by 64 men (9.0%) in the open group.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Prostate brachytherapy performed with ultrasound guidance does not appear to increase significantly complications resulting from the procedure. Both techniques appear to offer similar rates of procedures performed to correct urinary incontinence, bladder outlet obstruction and erectile dysfunction. The limitations of claim information in determining patient outcomes, however, must be considered when evaluating this data.
authors.affiliation: Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, Allegheny General Hospital, Pittsburgh, PA, USA. Rbenoit@triangleurology.com
authors.forename: R M
authors.initials: RM
authors.lastname: Benoit
authors.forename: M J
authors.initials: MJ
authors.lastname: Naslund
authors.forename: J K
authors.initials: JK
authors.lastname: Cohen
mesh_terms: D000368:Aged; D000369:Aged, 80 and over; D001918:Brachytherapy / Q000009:adverse effects* / Q000379:methods; D015331:Cohort Studies; D007172:Erectile Dysfunction / Q000209:etiology / Q000628:therapy; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D011471:Prostatic Neoplasms / Q000532:radiotherapy*; D018084:Ultrasonography, Interventional; D014524:Urethral Obstruction / Q000209:etiology / Q000628:therapy; D014549:Urinary Incontinence / Q000628:therapy