前列腺活检后的勃起功能障碍:经直肠与经会阴入路的比较分析。

IF 1.9 4区 医学 Q3 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY
O Ermis, M G Sonmez, A Tozsin, M S Iyisoy, M Yilmaz, G Sonmez, O O Cakir, A Aydin, L Tunc, E Barret, T Herrmann, K Ahmed, S Guven
{"title":"前列腺活检后的勃起功能障碍:经直肠与经会阴入路的比较分析。","authors":"O Ermis, M G Sonmez, A Tozsin, M S Iyisoy, M Yilmaz, G Sonmez, O O Cakir, A Aydin, L Tunc, E Barret, T Herrmann, K Ahmed, S Guven","doi":"10.1007/s11255-025-04816-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction and objectives: </strong>Erectile dysfunction (ED) is a concern for men undergoing prostate biopsy. With the increasing adoption of transperineal (TP) biopsy over transrectal (TR) biopsy, it remains unclear which approach carries a lower risk of erectile dysfunction. This study aims to be the first meta-analysis to evaluate erectile dysfunction following TR versus TP prostate biopsy at 1, 3 and 6 months intervals, thereby providing clinicians with evidence-based guidance for patient counseling and shared decision-making.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This review was prospectively registered on PROSPERO (CRD42024541557) and followed PRISMA guidelines, with searches conducted in PubMed, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library databases up to July 2024. A total of 22 studies reporting erectile function outcomes (IIEF scores) at baseline and 1, 3 and 6 months post-biopsy were identified. After applying inclusion and exclusion criteria, 12 studies were included in the final meta-analysis. TR and TP biopsy methods were compared using a random-effects model to assess standardized mean differences (SMD) in erectile function at each follow-up point. The risk of bias for each study was evaluated to ensure result reliability.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>At 1 month follow-up, a significant decline in erectile function was observed overall (SMD: - 0.3785, p = 0.038). The TP approach showed a slightly more significant decline than the TR approach; however, this difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.074). At 3 months follow-up, no significant differences were observed between methods overall (SMD: - 0.1663, p = 0.132), although TP biopsy alone showed a modest yet considerable decline (SMD: - 0.1868, p = 0.03). At 6 months, erectile function had generally returned to baseline, with no significant differences observed between biopsy techniques (p = 0.41).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Both TR and TP prostate biopsies are associated with a transient decline in erectile function. These effects typically resolve by 6 months in most patients, with no significant long-term impact observed. While the initial functional impact may be slightly greater with the TP technique, this difference attenuates over time. These findings are crucial for managing patient expectations post-biopsy.</p>","PeriodicalId":14454,"journal":{"name":"International Urology and Nephrology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Erectile dysfunction following prostate biopsy: a comparative analysis of transrectal versus transperineal approaches.\",\"authors\":\"O Ermis, M G Sonmez, A Tozsin, M S Iyisoy, M Yilmaz, G Sonmez, O O Cakir, A Aydin, L Tunc, E Barret, T Herrmann, K Ahmed, S Guven\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11255-025-04816-4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction and objectives: </strong>Erectile dysfunction (ED) is a concern for men undergoing prostate biopsy. With the increasing adoption of transperineal (TP) biopsy over transrectal (TR) biopsy, it remains unclear which approach carries a lower risk of erectile dysfunction. This study aims to be the first meta-analysis to evaluate erectile dysfunction following TR versus TP prostate biopsy at 1, 3 and 6 months intervals, thereby providing clinicians with evidence-based guidance for patient counseling and shared decision-making.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This review was prospectively registered on PROSPERO (CRD42024541557) and followed PRISMA guidelines, with searches conducted in PubMed, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library databases up to July 2024. A total of 22 studies reporting erectile function outcomes (IIEF scores) at baseline and 1, 3 and 6 months post-biopsy were identified. After applying inclusion and exclusion criteria, 12 studies were included in the final meta-analysis. TR and TP biopsy methods were compared using a random-effects model to assess standardized mean differences (SMD) in erectile function at each follow-up point. The risk of bias for each study was evaluated to ensure result reliability.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>At 1 month follow-up, a significant decline in erectile function was observed overall (SMD: - 0.3785, p = 0.038). The TP approach showed a slightly more significant decline than the TR approach; however, this difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.074). At 3 months follow-up, no significant differences were observed between methods overall (SMD: - 0.1663, p = 0.132), although TP biopsy alone showed a modest yet considerable decline (SMD: - 0.1868, p = 0.03). At 6 months, erectile function had generally returned to baseline, with no significant differences observed between biopsy techniques (p = 0.41).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Both TR and TP prostate biopsies are associated with a transient decline in erectile function. These effects typically resolve by 6 months in most patients, with no significant long-term impact observed. While the initial functional impact may be slightly greater with the TP technique, this difference attenuates over time. These findings are crucial for managing patient expectations post-biopsy.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14454,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Urology and Nephrology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-10-06\",\"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/s11255-025-04816-4\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Urology and Nephrology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11255-025-04816-4","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

简介和目的:勃起功能障碍(ED)是接受前列腺活检的男性关注的问题。随着越来越多的人采用经会阴(TP)活检而不是经直肠(TR)活检,目前尚不清楚哪种方法具有更低的勃起功能障碍风险。本研究旨在成为首个评估TR和TP前列腺活检后1、3和6个月的勃起功能障碍的荟萃分析,从而为临床医生提供患者咨询和共同决策的循证指导。材料和方法:本综述在PROSPERO (CRD42024541557)上前瞻性注册,并遵循PRISMA指南,检索PubMed、Scopus和Cochrane Library数据库至2024年7月。共有22项研究报告了基线和活检后1、3和6个月的勃起功能结局(IIEF评分)。在应用纳入和排除标准后,12项研究被纳入最终的meta分析。使用随机效应模型比较TR和TP活检方法,以评估每个随访点勃起功能的标准化平均差异(SMD)。对每项研究的偏倚风险进行评估以确保结果的可靠性。结果:在1个月的随访中,总体观察到勃起功能明显下降(SMD: - 0.3785, p = 0.038)。TP法比TR法下降幅度略大;但差异无统计学意义(p = 0.074)。在3个月的随访中,两种方法之间没有观察到显著差异(SMD: - 0.1663, p = 0.132),尽管单纯TP活检显示出适度但相当大的下降(SMD: - 0.1868, p = 0.03)。6个月时,勃起功能一般恢复到基线,活检技术之间没有显著差异(p = 0.41)。结论:TR和TP前列腺活检都与勃起功能的短暂下降有关。在大多数患者中,这些影响通常在6个月后消退,没有观察到明显的长期影响。虽然TP技术最初对功能的影响可能会稍微大一些,但这种差异会随着时间的推移而减弱。这些发现对于管理活检后患者的期望至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Erectile dysfunction following prostate biopsy: a comparative analysis of transrectal versus transperineal approaches.

Introduction and objectives: Erectile dysfunction (ED) is a concern for men undergoing prostate biopsy. With the increasing adoption of transperineal (TP) biopsy over transrectal (TR) biopsy, it remains unclear which approach carries a lower risk of erectile dysfunction. This study aims to be the first meta-analysis to evaluate erectile dysfunction following TR versus TP prostate biopsy at 1, 3 and 6 months intervals, thereby providing clinicians with evidence-based guidance for patient counseling and shared decision-making.

Materials and methods: This review was prospectively registered on PROSPERO (CRD42024541557) and followed PRISMA guidelines, with searches conducted in PubMed, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library databases up to July 2024. A total of 22 studies reporting erectile function outcomes (IIEF scores) at baseline and 1, 3 and 6 months post-biopsy were identified. After applying inclusion and exclusion criteria, 12 studies were included in the final meta-analysis. TR and TP biopsy methods were compared using a random-effects model to assess standardized mean differences (SMD) in erectile function at each follow-up point. The risk of bias for each study was evaluated to ensure result reliability.

Results: At 1 month follow-up, a significant decline in erectile function was observed overall (SMD: - 0.3785, p = 0.038). The TP approach showed a slightly more significant decline than the TR approach; however, this difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.074). At 3 months follow-up, no significant differences were observed between methods overall (SMD: - 0.1663, p = 0.132), although TP biopsy alone showed a modest yet considerable decline (SMD: - 0.1868, p = 0.03). At 6 months, erectile function had generally returned to baseline, with no significant differences observed between biopsy techniques (p = 0.41).

Conclusion: Both TR and TP prostate biopsies are associated with a transient decline in erectile function. These effects typically resolve by 6 months in most patients, with no significant long-term impact observed. While the initial functional impact may be slightly greater with the TP technique, this difference attenuates over time. These findings are crucial for managing patient expectations post-biopsy.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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