Transperineal Versus Transrectal Magnetic Resonance Imaging-targeted Prostate Biopsy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Prospective Studies

被引:6
|
作者
Zattoni, Fabio [1 ,2 ]
Rajwa, Pawel [3 ,4 ]
Miszczyk, Marcin [3 ,5 ]
Fazekas, Tamas [3 ,6 ]
Carletti, Filippo [1 ]
Carrozza, Salvatore [1 ]
Sattin, Francesca [1 ]
Reitano, Giuseppe [1 ]
Botti, Simone [1 ]
Matsukawa, Akihiro [3 ,7 ]
Dal Moro, Fabrizio [1 ]
Karnes, R. Jeffrey [8 ]
Briganti, Alberto [9 ]
Novara, Giacomo [1 ]
Shariat, Shahrokh F. [3 ,6 ,10 ,11 ,12 ,13 ,14 ,15 ,16 ]
Ploussard, Guillaume [17 ]
Gandaglia, Giorgio [9 ]
机构
[1] Univ Padua, Dept Surg Oncol & Gastroenterol, Urol Clin, Padua, Italy
[2] Univ Padua, Dept Med DIMED, Padua, Italy
[3] Med Univ Vienna, Comprehens Canc Ctr, Dept Urol, Vienna, Austria
[4] Med Univ Silesia, Dept Urol, PL-41800 Zabrze, Poland
[5] Mazovian Acad Plock, Fac Med, Coll Med, PL-08110 Plock, Poland
[6] Semmelweis Univ, Dept Urol, Budapest, Hungary
[7] Jikei Univ, Sch Med, Dept Urol, Tokyo, Japan
[8] Mayo Clin, Dept Urol, Rochester, MN USA
[9] IRCCS Osped San Raffaele, Div Oncol, Unit Urol, URI, Milan, Italy
[10] Sechenov Univ, Inst Urol & Reprod Hlth, Moscow, Russia
[11] Univ Texas Southwestern Med Ctr, Dept Urol, Dallas, TX USA
[12] Weill Cornell Med Coll, Dept Urol, New York, NY USA
[13] Charles Univ Prague, Fac Med 2, Dept Urol, Prague, Czech Republic
[14] Univ Jordan, Dept Special Surg, Div Urol, Amman, Jordan
[15] Karl Landsteiner Inst Urol & Androl, Vienna, Austria
[16] Tabriz Univ Med Sci, Res Ctr Evidence Based Med, Urol Dept, Tabriz, Iran
[17] La Croix Sud Hosp, Quint Fonsegrives, France
来源
EUROPEAN UROLOGY ONCOLOGY | 2024年 / 7卷 / 06期
关键词
Prostate biopsy; Magnetic resonance imaging; Targeted biopsy; Transperineal; Transrectal; Prostate cancer; CANCER;
D O I
10.1016/j.euo.2024.07.009
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Background and objective: The benefits of the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) and safety of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-targeted transperineal (TP) prostate biopsy (TP-Tbx) versus transrectal (TR) approaches are still a matter of debate. This review aims to compare the efficacy and safety of TP-Tbx and MRI-targeted TR biopsy (TR-Tbx). Methods: A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed/Medline, Scopus, and Web of Science to identify records of prospective randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing TP-Tbx and TR-Tbx published until May 2024. The primary outcomes included detection rates of csPCa (International Society of Urological Pathology [ISUP] >= 2) and rates of complications. Key findings and limitations: Three RCTs (PREVENT, ProBE-PC, and PERFECT) met the inclusion criteria. The TR technique was commonly administered with antibiotic prophylaxis to mitigate infection risks or after a rectal swab. No difference was found between TP-Tbx and TR-Tbx in terms of either csPCa (odds ratio [OR] 0.9, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.7-1.1) or ISUP 1 prostate cancer (PCa; OR 1.1,95% CI: 0.8-1.4) detection. Postprocedural infection (OR 0.8, 95% CI: 0.4-1.8), sepsis (OR 0.6, 95% CI: 0.1-4.5), and urinary retention rates (OR 0.5, 95% CI: 0.1-1.6) were similar. Pain during the TP approach was slightly higher than during the TR approach, but after 7 d of follow-up, the differences between the two approaches were minimal. Variations in biopsy numbers per patient, patient selection, use of 5-alpha reductase inhibitors, needle sizes, TP techniques, and pain scores (reported in only one RCT), along with the multicenter nature of RCTs, limit the study. Conclusions and clinical implications: TP-Tbx and TR-Tbx show similar results in detecting PCa, with comparable rates of infections, urinary retention, and effectiveness in managing biopsy-associated pain. TP-Tbx can safely omit antibiotics without increasing infection risk, unlike TR-Tbx. The tendency to exclude from practice TR-Tbx with prophylactic antibiotics due to infection concerns could be moderated; however, the directionality of some key outcomes, as infections and sepsis, favor the TP approach despite a lack of statistical significance. Patient summary: There were no significant differences in the prostate biopsy approaches (transperineal [TP] vs transrectal [TR]) for prostate cancer detection and complications. However, the MRI-targeted TP prostate biopsy approach may be advantageous as it can be performed safely without antibiotics, potentially reducing antibiotic resistance. (c) 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of European Association of Urology. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
引用
收藏
页码:1303 / 1312
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Magnetic Resonance Imaging-targeted Biopsy May Enhance the Diagnostic Accuracy of Significant Prostate Cancer Detection Compared to Standard Transrectal Ultrasound-guided Biopsy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
    Schoots, Ivo G.
    Roobol, Monique J.
    Nieboer, Daan
    Bangma, Chris H.
    Steyerberg, Ewout W.
    Hunink, M. G. Myriam
    EUROPEAN UROLOGY, 2015, 68 (03) : 438 - 450
  • [22] A systematic review and meta-analysis of magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasound guided fusion biopsy of prostate for cancer detection-Comparing transrectal with transperineal approaches
    Loy, Liang Meng
    Lim, Gek Hsiang
    Leow, Jeffrey J.
    Lee, Chau Hung
    Tan, Teck Wei
    Tan, Cher Heng
    UROLOGIC ONCOLOGY-SEMINARS AND ORIGINAL INVESTIGATIONS, 2020, 38 (08) : 650 - 660
  • [23] Transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy for prostate cancer detection: Systematic and/or magnetic-resonance imaging-targeted
    Bladou, Franck
    Fogaing, Cora
    Levental, Mark
    Aronson, Samuel
    Alameldin, Mona
    Anidjar, Maurice
    CUAJ-CANADIAN UROLOGICAL ASSOCIATION JOURNAL, 2017, 11 (09): : E330 - E337
  • [24] Initial experience with a novel method for cognitive transperineal magnetic resonance imaging-targeted prostate biopsy
    Wang, Hai-Feng
    Chen, Rui
    He, Bi-Ming
    Qu, Min
    Wang, Yan
    Lin, Heng-Zhi
    Yang, Qing-Song
    Gao, Xu
    Sun, Ying-Hao
    ASIAN JOURNAL OF ANDROLOGY, 2020, 22 (04) : 432 - 436
  • [25] PROSTATE BIOPSY SEPSIS: A META-ANALYSIS OF TRANSRECTAL VERSUS TRANSPERINEAL PROSTATE BIOPSY INFECTION RATES
    Gross, Michael
    Alshak, Mark
    Cai, Peter Y.
    Demetres, Michelle
    Mauer, Elizabeth
    Hu, Jim
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2019, 201 (04): : E782 - E782
  • [26] Diagnostic Role of Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Targeted Biopsy for Prostate Cancer in Biopsy-Naive Men: A Meta-Analysis
    Tu, Xiang
    Liu, Zhenhua
    Zhang, Chichen
    Chang, Tiancong
    Xu, He
    Bao, Yige
    Li, Jiakun
    Jin, Kun
    Yuan, Qiming
    Qiu, Shi
    Yang, Lu
    Wei, Qiang
    UROLOGIA INTERNATIONALIS, 2020, 104 (3-4) : 187 - 198
  • [27] Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Targeted Biopsy and Pretherapeutic Prostate Cancer Risk Assessment: a Systematic Review
    Diamand, R.
    Mjaess, G.
    Ploussard, G.
    Fiard, G.
    Oderda, M.
    Lefebvre, Y.
    Sirtaine, N.
    Roumeguere, T.
    Peltier, A.
    Albisinni, S.
    PROGRES EN UROLOGIE, 2022, 32 (06):
  • [28] Is magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy a useful addition to systematic confirmatory biopsy in men on active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer? A systematic review and meta-analysis
    Schoots, Ivo G.
    Nieboer, Daan
    Giganti, Francesco
    Moore, Caroline M.
    Bangma, Chris H.
    Roobol, Monique J.
    BJU INTERNATIONAL, 2018, 122 (06) : 946 - 958
  • [29] ROUTINE SYSTEMATIC PROSTATE BIOPSIES NOT REPLACED BY MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING-TARGETED BIOPSY
    Gomez-Ortiz, David
    Garza-Gangemi, Adrian M.
    Oropeza-Aguilar, Mariano
    Rangel-Suarez, Sergio
    Espinosa-Cruz, Veronica
    Villegas-Hernandez, Antonio C.
    Martinez-Martinez, Ricardo
    Castillejos-Molina, Ricardo A.
    REVISTA DE INVESTIGACION CLINICA-CLINICAL AND TRANSLATIONAL INVESTIGATION, 2022, 74 (04): : 212 - 218
  • [30] Elastic Versus Rigid Image Registration in Magnetic Resonance Imaging-transrectal Ultrasound Fusion Prostate Biopsy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
    Venderink, Wulphert
    de Rooij, Maarten
    Sedelaar, J. P. Michiel
    Huisman, Henkjan J.
    Futterer, Jurgen J.
    EUROPEAN UROLOGY FOCUS, 2018, 4 (02): : 219 - 227