Comparison of prostate cancer detection rates and complications between transrectal ultrasound-guided transperineal and transrectal biopsies: a systematic review and meta-analysis

经直肠超声引导经会阴和经直肠活检术前列腺癌检出率和并发症的比较:系统评价和荟萃分析

阅读:1

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided transperineal (TP) and transrectal (TR) approaches have been used for systematic prostate biopsy. A meta-analysis was conducted to compare the cancer detection rates (CDRs) and associated complications between TP and TR prostate biopsies. METHODS: PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Library, China Wanfang data, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) were searched for literature on TP and TR biopsies of the prostate from inception to September 2024. RESULTS: A total of 20 studies were included in the meta-analysis of 2,979 and 2,610 patients undergoing TP and TR biopsies, respectively. The pooled analysis indicated no significant difference in the CDR between the TP and TR biopsies [relative risk (RR) =0.98; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.92-1.04; P=0.46]. Compared to the TR approach, the TP approach was associated with a lower risk of rectal bleeding (RR =0.05; 95% CI: 0.02-0.13; P<0.001), urinary retention (RR =0.70; 95% CI: 0.49-0.99; P=0.046), and fever (RR =0.24, 95% CI: 0.15-0.39; P<0.001). However, the risk of pain after the procedure was higher in the TP group (RR =2.04; 95% CI: 1.47-2.82; P<0.001). No significant difference was found in the risk of hematuria between the two groups (RR =1.05; 95% CI: 0.91-1.22; P=0.52). CONCLUSIONS: TP and TR biopsies of the prostate have similar CDRs. Remarkably, compared to TR biopsy, TP biopsy involves a lower risk of rectal bleeding, urinary retention, and fever, but a higher risk of pain.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。