Meta Analysis of Efficacy and Safety of Prostate Biopsy: A Comparison Between Transperineal and Transrectal Approach.

0 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY
Syah Mirsya Warli, Stivano Rizky Valentino Torry, Dhirajaya Dharma Kadar, Ginanda Putra Siregar, Fauriski Febrian Prapiska
{"title":"Meta Analysis of Efficacy and Safety of Prostate Biopsy: A Comparison Between Transperineal and Transrectal Approach.","authors":"Syah Mirsya Warli, Stivano Rizky Valentino Torry, Dhirajaya Dharma Kadar, Ginanda Putra Siregar, Fauriski Febrian Prapiska","doi":"10.5152/tud.2025.24094","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Improved prostate biopsy procedures have been developed to overcome traditional limitations, aiming to enhance cancer diagnosis accuracy. To assess the existing knowledge of the effectiveness and risks linked to transperineal (TP) vs. transrectal (TR) prostate biopsy. Approaches: a comprehensive search was carried out in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library to locate all pertinent papers published till June 8, 2023. Data on cancer detection rate and complications after prostate biopsy were gathered and analyzed via Review Manager software. A subgroup analysis was conducted to evaluate the influence of the study type. A total of 19 publications, involving 80133 patients with suspicion of prostate cancer who underwent prostate biopsy, were enrolled in the analysis. The pooled estimate demonstrated no significant differences in the cancer detection rate between TR and TP (risk difference (RD)=0.03; 95% CI: -0.01 to 0.08; P = .12). In terms of complications, the TP approach significantly decreased the risk of rectal bleeding (odds ratio (OR)=0.24; 95% CI: 0.12-0.51; P < .001), fever and urinary tract infection (OR=0.28; 95% CI: 0.15-0.52; P < .001), and sepsis (OR=0.50; 95% CI: 0.28-0.90; P=.02) compared to the TR approach. In conclusion, there was no significant disparity in the cancer detection rate between TP and TR approaches. However, the TP strategy exhibited an advantage over TR due to a reduced risk of infection and rectal bleeding. Further research is needed to validate these results and develop a more efficient diagnostic approach for prostate cancer.</p>","PeriodicalId":101337,"journal":{"name":"Urology research & practice","volume":"50 4","pages":"208-218"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11883667/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Urology research & practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5152/tud.2025.24094","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Improved prostate biopsy procedures have been developed to overcome traditional limitations, aiming to enhance cancer diagnosis accuracy. To assess the existing knowledge of the effectiveness and risks linked to transperineal (TP) vs. transrectal (TR) prostate biopsy. Approaches: a comprehensive search was carried out in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library to locate all pertinent papers published till June 8, 2023. Data on cancer detection rate and complications after prostate biopsy were gathered and analyzed via Review Manager software. A subgroup analysis was conducted to evaluate the influence of the study type. A total of 19 publications, involving 80133 patients with suspicion of prostate cancer who underwent prostate biopsy, were enrolled in the analysis. The pooled estimate demonstrated no significant differences in the cancer detection rate between TR and TP (risk difference (RD)=0.03; 95% CI: -0.01 to 0.08; P = .12). In terms of complications, the TP approach significantly decreased the risk of rectal bleeding (odds ratio (OR)=0.24; 95% CI: 0.12-0.51; P < .001), fever and urinary tract infection (OR=0.28; 95% CI: 0.15-0.52; P < .001), and sepsis (OR=0.50; 95% CI: 0.28-0.90; P=.02) compared to the TR approach. In conclusion, there was no significant disparity in the cancer detection rate between TP and TR approaches. However, the TP strategy exhibited an advantage over TR due to a reduced risk of infection and rectal bleeding. Further research is needed to validate these results and develop a more efficient diagnostic approach for prostate cancer.

前列腺活检的有效性和安全性的Meta分析:经会阴入路和经直肠入路的比较。
改进的前列腺活检程序已经开发克服传统的局限性,旨在提高癌症诊断的准确性。评估经会阴前列腺活检(TP)与经直肠前列腺活检(TR)的有效性和风险。方法:在PubMed、Embase、Web of Science和Cochrane Library进行全面检索,找到2023年6月8日之前发表的所有相关论文。通过Review Manager软件收集前列腺活检后肿瘤检出率及并发症的数据并进行分析。进行亚组分析以评估研究类型的影响。共有19篇出版物纳入分析,涉及80133名接受前列腺活检的疑似前列腺癌患者。合并估计显示,TR和TP之间的癌症检出率无显著差异(风险差异(RD)=0.03;95% CI: -0.01 ~ 0.08;P = .12)。在并发症方面,TP入路显著降低直肠出血的风险(优势比(OR)=0.24;95% ci: 0.12-0.51;P < 0.001)、发热和尿路感染(OR=0.28;95% ci: 0.15-0.52;P < 0.001),脓毒症(OR=0.50;95% ci: 0.28-0.90;P=.02)。综上所述,TP入路与TR入路的肿瘤检出率无显著差异。然而,由于降低了感染和直肠出血的风险,TP策略表现出优于TR的优势。需要进一步的研究来验证这些结果,并开发一种更有效的前列腺癌诊断方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信