Transgluteal MRI-targeted biopsy versus transrectal systemic biopsy in prostate cancer diagnosis.

IF 1.9 4区 医学 Q3 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY
International Urology and Nephrology Pub Date : 2025-11-01 Epub Date: 2025-04-24 DOI:10.1007/s11255-025-04522-1
Zixi An, Pengyu Sun, Min Liu, Jianwei Li, Chenyu Lin, Huaxing Zhu, Runsong Xue
{"title":"Transgluteal MRI-targeted biopsy versus transrectal systemic biopsy in prostate cancer diagnosis.","authors":"Zixi An, Pengyu Sun, Min Liu, Jianwei Li, Chenyu Lin, Huaxing Zhu, Runsong Xue","doi":"10.1007/s11255-025-04522-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare the detection rate of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) between transgluteal in-bore magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy (MRI-TB) and transrectal ultrasonography biopsy (TRUSBx) in biopsy-naïve men, and which technique has lower complication rates.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>From October 2021 to July 2024, clinical data were collected, retrospectively, from patients who underwent multiparameter MRI but had not previously undergone a prostate biopsy at hospital. The cases were considered based on the inclusion criteria. The patients were separated into two groups based on the prostate biopsy technique: TRUSBx (control group) and transgluteal MRI-TB (observation group). The csPCa detection and complications rates were compared between the two groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We gathered data from 150 patients. A total of 91 patients participated, comprising 58 in the control group and 33 in the observation group. The detection rates of csPCa in the two groups were 27.3% and 22.4%, respectively (P > 0.05). Subsequent analysis revealed no significant difference in the csPCa detection rate between the two groups concerning various TPSA levels, lesion location, prostate volume, maximal lesion diameter, and PI-RADS score (P > 0.05). There were notable discrepancies in the occurrence of overall complications and hemorrhage between the two groups (P < 0.05), although no significant variations were observed in the incidence of fever, hematochezia, and dysuria (P > 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Transgluteal MRI-TB can diminish complications while preserving csPCa detection rates. The evidence indicates that transgluteal MRI-TB is a more secure alternative for patients at elevated risk of infection and hemorrhage. And the pathway does not necessitate puncture tray or associated anesthetic management facilities.</p>","PeriodicalId":14454,"journal":{"name":"International Urology and Nephrology","volume":" ","pages":"3499-3505"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Urology and Nephrology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11255-025-04522-1","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/4/24 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To compare the detection rate of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) between transgluteal in-bore magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy (MRI-TB) and transrectal ultrasonography biopsy (TRUSBx) in biopsy-naïve men, and which technique has lower complication rates.

Methods: From October 2021 to July 2024, clinical data were collected, retrospectively, from patients who underwent multiparameter MRI but had not previously undergone a prostate biopsy at hospital. The cases were considered based on the inclusion criteria. The patients were separated into two groups based on the prostate biopsy technique: TRUSBx (control group) and transgluteal MRI-TB (observation group). The csPCa detection and complications rates were compared between the two groups.

Results: We gathered data from 150 patients. A total of 91 patients participated, comprising 58 in the control group and 33 in the observation group. The detection rates of csPCa in the two groups were 27.3% and 22.4%, respectively (P > 0.05). Subsequent analysis revealed no significant difference in the csPCa detection rate between the two groups concerning various TPSA levels, lesion location, prostate volume, maximal lesion diameter, and PI-RADS score (P > 0.05). There were notable discrepancies in the occurrence of overall complications and hemorrhage between the two groups (P < 0.05), although no significant variations were observed in the incidence of fever, hematochezia, and dysuria (P > 0.05).

Conclusion: Transgluteal MRI-TB can diminish complications while preserving csPCa detection rates. The evidence indicates that transgluteal MRI-TB is a more secure alternative for patients at elevated risk of infection and hemorrhage. And the pathway does not necessitate puncture tray or associated anesthetic management facilities.

经臀核磁共振活检与经直肠全身活检在前列腺癌诊断中的比较。
目的:比较biopsy-naïve男性经臀内腔磁共振成像活检(MRI-TB)与经直肠超声活检(TRUSBx)对临床意义显著的前列腺癌(csPCa)的检出率,以及哪种技术的并发症发生率更低。方法:从2021年10月至2024年7月,回顾性收集临床资料,这些患者接受了多参数MRI检查,但之前没有在医院接受过前列腺活检。这些病例是根据纳入标准考虑的。根据前列腺活检技术将患者分为两组:TRUSBx组(对照组)和经臀MRI-TB组(观察组)。比较两组csPCa检出率及并发症发生率。结果:我们收集了150例患者的数据。共91例患者参与,其中对照组58例,观察组33例。两组csPCa检出率分别为27.3%和22.4% (P < 0.05)。随后的分析显示,两组在不同TPSA水平、病变部位、前列腺体积、最大病变直径、PI-RADS评分方面的csPCa检出率差异无统计学意义(P < 0.05)。两组总并发症及出血发生率比较,差异有统计学意义(P < 0.05)。结论:经臀MRI-TB可减少并发症,同时保持csPCa的检出率。有证据表明,经臀MRI-TB对于感染和出血风险较高的患者是一种更安全的选择。该途径不需要穿刺托盘或相关的麻醉管理设施。
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
International Urology and Nephrology
International Urology and Nephrology 医学-泌尿学与肾脏学
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
5.00%
发文量
329
审稿时长
1.7 months
期刊介绍: International Urology and Nephrology publishes original papers on a broad range of topics in urology, nephrology and andrology. The journal integrates papers originating from clinical practice.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信