Why the study?
Does continued antithrombotic therapy increase clinically significant hemorrhagic complications in patients undergoing TRUS-guided prostate biopsy?
Does continued antithrombotic therapy increase clinically significant hemorrhagic complications in patients undergoing TRUS-guided prostate biopsy?
Continuing antithrombotic therapy during TRUS-guided prostate biopsy appears feasible and safe, particularly for patients at high thromboembolic risk.
Supports continuation of antithrombotic therapy in high thromboembolic risk patients for TRUS-guided prostate biopsy; extends retrospective safety data but requires prospective confirmation.[[1]](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/403773862_Hemorrhagic_Risk_of_Transrectal_Ultrasound-Guided_Prostate_Biopsy_Under_Continued_Antithrombotic_Therapy)[[2]](https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.
TRUS-guided prostate biopsy under sacral anesthesia appeared feasible without discontinuation of antithrombotic therapy and was not associated with a clear excess of clinically significant hemorrhagic complications. In selected patients, particularly those at high thromboembolic risk, continuing antithrombotic therapy may be a reasonable option, although a modest increase in bleeding risk cannot be definitively excluded.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Akagi et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: