Springer Nature is making SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

Does time interval between prostate biopsy and surgery affect outcomes of radical prostatectomy? A systematic review and meta-analysis



This study aimed at exploring whether the time interval (TI) between prostate biopsy and surgery affect the outcomes of radical prostatectomy (RP).


A comprehensive search of the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases was conducted to identify all eligible studies. After quality assessment and date extraction, a systematic review and meta-analysis was performed.


A total of 9 studies with 8579 patients were included in our meta-analysis. Pooled data showed no significant differences between groups of TI ≤ 2 weeks and > 2 weeks in operative time, estimated blood loss, transfusion rate, bilateral nerve preservation, positively surgical margin, and complications. For comparison between TI ≤ 4 and > 4 weeks, shorter TI would be associated with significantly less estimated blood loss (p = 0.045) and lower rate of bilateral nerve preservation (p = 0.002). In addition, for TI ≤ 6 versus > 6 weeks, significantly less bilateral nerve preservation (p = 0.025) and more positive surgical margin (p = 0.020) could be found in the earlier surgery group. Sensitivity analysis indicated that TI had no impact on any outcomes of robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALP).


As shorter TI was associated with lower rate of bilateral nerve preservation and higher rate of positive surgical margin, it would be better to perform RP with a TI of 4 or 6 weeks after biopsy. While for RALP, shorter TI did not have any impact on outcomes of RALP, It is feasible and safe to perform RALP within 2, 4, or 6 weeks.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4


  1. 1.

    Mottet N, Bellmunt J, Bolla M et al (2017) EAU-ESTRO-SIOG guidelines on prostate cancer. Part 1: screening, diagnosis, and local treatment with curative intent. Eur Urol 71(4):618–629

  2. 2.

    Walsh PC, Retik AB, Darracott Vaughan EJ, Wein AJ (2002) Radical prostatectomy in Campbel’s urology, 8th edn. WB Saunders, Philadelphia, pp 3107–3128

  3. 3.

    Sokoloff MH, Brendler CB (2001) Indications and contraindications for nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy. Urol Clin N Am 28(3):535–543

  4. 4.

    Zanaty M, Alnazari M, Ajib K et al (2018) Does surgical delay for radical prostatectomy affect biochemical recurrence? A retrospective analysis from a Canadian cohort. World J Urol 36(1):1–6

  5. 5.

    Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, Group P (2009) Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. BMJ (Clin Res Ed) 339:2535

  6. 6.

    Stroup DF, Berlin JA, Morton SC et al (2000) Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: a proposal for reporting. Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology (MOOSE) group. JAMA 283(15):2008–2012

  7. 7.

    Wells GA, Shea B, O’Connell D et al (2014) The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for assessing the quality of nonrandomised studies in meta-analyses. http://www.ohri.ca/programs/clinical_epidemiology/nosgen.pdf. Accessed 10 Mar 2019

  8. 8.

    Choi H, Ko YH, Kang SG et al (2009) Biopsy related prostate status does not affect on the clinicopathological outcome of robotic assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Cancer Res Treat 41(4):205–210

  9. 9.

    Dell’Atti L, Capparelli G, Papa S, Ippolito C (2016) Can radical prostatectomy shortly after prostate biopsy affect intra-operative and postoperative outcomes? Asian J Androl 18(3):496–497

  10. 10.

    Eggener SE, Yossepowitch O, Serio AM, Vickers AJ, Scardino PT, Eastham JA (2007) Radical prostatectomy shortly after prostate biopsy does not affect operative difficulty or efficacy. Urology 69(6):1128–1133

  11. 11.

    He M, Li Y, Xiang Z et al (2018) Short interval of biopsy to robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy does not render any adverse effects on the perioperative outcomes. Med (Baltim) 97(36):e11686

  12. 12.

    Jo JK, Oh JJ, Lee S et al (2017) Can robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALP) be performed very soon after biopsy? World J Urol 35(4):605–612

  13. 13.

    Lee SH, Chung MS, Chung YG, Park KK, Chung BH (2011) Does performance of robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy within 2 weeks of prostate biopsy affect the outcome? Int J Urol 18(2):141–146

  14. 14.

    Martin GL, Nunez RN, Humphreys MD et al (2009) Interval from prostate biopsy to robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: effects on perioperative outcomes. BJU Int 104(11):1734–1737

  15. 15.

    Park B, Choo SH, Jeon HG et al (2014) Interval from prostate biopsy to radical prostatectomy does not affect immediate operative outcomes for open or minimally invasive approach. J Korean Med Sci 29(12):1688–1693

  16. 16.

    Adiyat KT, Murugesan M, Katkoori D, Eldefrawy A, Soloway MS (2010) Total prostatectomy within 6 weeks of a prostate biopsy: is it safe? Int Braz J Urol. 36(2):177–181 (discussion 82)

  17. 17.

    Ikonen S, Kivisaari L, Vehmas T et al (2001) Optimal timing of post-biopsy MR imaging of the prostate. Acta Radiol (Stockh Swed: 1987) 42(1):70–73

  18. 18.

    Lee DK, Allareddy V, O’Donnell MA, Williams RD, Konety BR (2006) Does the interval between prostate biopsy and radical prostatectomy affect the immediate postoperative outcome? BJU international. 97(1):48–50

  19. 19.

    Kim IS, Na W, Nam JS et al (2011) Interval from prostate biopsy to robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALP): effects on surgical difficulties. Korean J Urol 52(10):664–668

  20. 20.

    Xiang J, Yan H, Li J, Wang X, Chen H, Zheng X (2019) Transperineal versus transrectal prostate biopsy in the diagnosis of prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. World J Surg Oncol. 17(1):31

  21. 21.

    Adolfsson J (2008) Watchful waiting and active surveillance: the current position. BJU Int 102(1):10–14

  22. 22.

    Rabbani F, Stapleton AM, Kattan MW, Wheeler TM, Scardino PT (2000) Factors predicting recovery of erections after radical prostatectomy. J Urol 164(6):1929–1934

  23. 23.

    Eastham JA, Kattan MW, Rogers E et al (1996) Risk factors for urinary incontinence after radical prostatectomy. J Urol 156(5):1707–1713

  24. 24.

    Morini MA, Muller RL, de Castro Junior PCB, de Souza RJ, Faria EF (2018) Time between diagnosis and surgical treatment on pathological and clinical outcomes in prostate cancer: does it matter? World J Urol 36(8):1225–1231

  25. 25.

    Korets R, Seager CM, Pitman MS, Hruby GW, Benson MC, McKiernan JM (2012) Effect of delaying surgery on radical prostatectomy outcomes: a contemporary analysis. BJU Int 110(2):211–216

  26. 26.

    Vickers AJ, Bianco FJ Jr, Boorjian S, Scardino PT, Eastham JA (2006) Does a delay between diagnosis and radical prostatectomy increase the risk of disease recurrence? Cancer 106(3):576–580

  27. 27.

    Hirasawa Y, Ohori M, Sugihara T et al (2017) No clinical significance of the time interval between biopsy and robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy for patients with clinically localized prostate cancer on biochemical recurrence: a propensity score matching analysis. Jpn J Clin Oncol 47(11):1083–1089

  28. 28.

    Meunier ME, Neuzillet Y, Radulescu C et al (2018) Does the delay from prostate biopsy to radical prostatectomy influence the risk of biochemical recurrence? Progres Urol 28(10):475–481

  29. 29.

    O’Brien D, Loeb S, Carvalhal GF et al (2011) Delay of surgery in men with low risk prostate cancer. J Urol 185(6):2143–2147

Download references

Author information

Jie Li: Manuscript writing, Data analysis. Qing Jiang: Manuscript editing, Data collection. Qiubo Li: Data management. Yuanfeng Zhang: Data collection. Liang Gao: Project development, Manuscript editing.

Correspondence to Liang Gao.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Ethical approval

No ethical approval was necessary due to its exclusive use of secondary data.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained where appropriate within the included manuscripts included in this study.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Li, J., Jiang, Q., Li, Q. et al. Does time interval between prostate biopsy and surgery affect outcomes of radical prostatectomy? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Int Urol Nephrol (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11255-019-02344-6

Download citation


  • Biopsy
  • Meta-analysis
  • Prostate cancer
  • Prostatectomy
  • Time interval