Investigation of the Relationship of Two-Glass Test with Prostate Biopsy and Presence and Grade of Asymptomatic Prostate Inflammation in Men with Serum Prostate-Specific Antigen Level Between 2.5-10 ng/ml

Abstract

Objective: Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) is utilized as a marker to detect prostate cancer. Elevated PSA levels often lead to prostate biopsy to assess the potential presence of cancer. However, PSA elevation is not specific to cancer and can be caused by various conditions, including benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), urinary tract infections, and chronic prostatitis. Notably, approximately 66% of patients undergoing biopsy do not have prostate cancer, leading to unnecessary procedures and associated complications. Chronic prostatitis is detected in around 40% of these biopsies. The two-glass test involves examining urine before and after a rectal examination to diagnose chronic prostatitis. This study aims to investigate the effectiveness of the two-glass test in predicting prostatitis and inflammation in patients with PSA levels between 2.5-10 ng/ml who have undergone prostate needle biopsy. Materials and Methods: The study included fifty-two male patients aged between 50 and 78 years with PSA levels between 2.5 and 10 ng/ml who presented to our clinic. All patients underwent the EPS-two-glass test and prostate biopsy. EPS (expressed prostatic secretion) is obtained by collecting fluid from the urethra after prostate massage, while VB-3 (voided bladder-3) is urine collected after a massage. These samples are used to detect prostate infection. Prostate inflammation was deemed significant if >= 10 leukocytes were observed under the microscope. Patients were categorized into three groups based on pathology results: prostate cancer, BPH, and chronic prostatitis. The chronic prostatitis group was further classified based on histopathological calcification described by Nickel. Results: Chronic prostatitis was detected in 38% of the study participants. VB3 positivity was significantly higher in the chronic prostatitis group compared to the other groups (p = 0.028). Although no significant difference was observed in the prevalence of inflammation and PSA elevation, PSA levels were higher in the multifocal inflammation subgroup compared to the focal inflammation group. Conclusions: The relationship between chronic prostatitis and PSA elevation remains unclear. Although this study did not find a statistical relationship between inflammation and PSA elevation, the significant correlation between chronic prostatitis and VB3 positivity suggests a potential link. These findings can serve as a foundation for further research aimed at reducing unnecessary biopsies.