期刊文献+

The results of transperineal versus transrectal prostate biopsy: a systematic review and meta-analysis 被引量:16

The results of transperineal versus transrectal prostate biopsy: a systematic review and meta-analysis
在线阅读 下载PDF
导出
摘要 This systematic review was performed to compare the efficacy and complications of transperineal (TP) vs. transrectal (TR) prostate biopsy. A systematic research of PUBM ED, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library was performed to identify all clinical controlled trials on prostate cancer (PCa) detection rate and complications achieved by TP and TR biopsies. Prostate biopsies included sextant, extensive and saturation biopsy procedures. All patients were assigned to a TR group and a TP group. Subgroup analysis was performed according to prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels and digital rectal examination (DRE) findings. The Cochrane Collaboration's RevMan 5.1 software was used for the meta-analysis. A total of seven trials, including three randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and four casecontrol studies (CCS), met our inclusion criteria. There was no significant difference in the cancer detection rate between the sextant TR and TP groups (risk difference (RD), -0.02; 95% confidence interval (CI), -0.08-0.03; P=0.34). Meta-analysis for RCTs combined with CCS showed that there was no difference in the cancer detection rate between the extensive TR and TP group (RD, -0.01; 95% CI, -0.05-0.04; P=0.81). There was no significant difference in PCa detection rate between the saturation TR and TP approaches (31.4% vs. 25.7%, respectively;P=0.3). There were also no significant differences in cancer detection between the TR and TP groups in each subgroup. Although the data on complications were not pooled for the meta-analysis, no significant difference was found when comparing TR and TP studies. TR and TP biopsies were equivalent in terms of efficiency and related complications. TP prostate biopsy should be an available and alternative procedure for use by urologists. This systematic review was performed to compare the efficacy and complications of transperineal (TP) vs. transrectal (TR) prostate biopsy. A systematic research of PUBM ED, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library was performed to identify all clinical controlled trials on prostate cancer (PCa) detection rate and complications achieved by TP and TR biopsies. Prostate biopsies included sextant, extensive and saturation biopsy procedures. All patients were assigned to a TR group and a TP group. Subgroup analysis was performed according to prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels and digital rectal examination (DRE) findings. The Cochrane Collaboration's RevMan 5.1 software was used for the meta-analysis. A total of seven trials, including three randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and four casecontrol studies (CCS), met our inclusion criteria. There was no significant difference in the cancer detection rate between the sextant TR and TP groups (risk difference (RD), -0.02; 95% confidence interval (CI), -0.08-0.03; P=0.34). Meta-analysis for RCTs combined with CCS showed that there was no difference in the cancer detection rate between the extensive TR and TP group (RD, -0.01; 95% CI, -0.05-0.04; P=0.81). There was no significant difference in PCa detection rate between the saturation TR and TP approaches (31.4% vs. 25.7%, respectively;P=0.3). There were also no significant differences in cancer detection between the TR and TP groups in each subgroup. Although the data on complications were not pooled for the meta-analysis, no significant difference was found when comparing TR and TP studies. TR and TP biopsies were equivalent in terms of efficiency and related complications. TP prostate biopsy should be an available and alternative procedure for use by urologists.
出处 《Asian Journal of Andrology》 SCIE CAS CSCD 2012年第2期310-315,共6页 亚洲男性学杂志(英文版)
基金 This review was supported by Nationnal Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC 81172439).
关键词 prostate biopsy prostate cancer TRANSPERINEAL TRANSRECTAL prostate biopsy prostate cancer transperineal transrectal
  • 相关文献

参考文献4

二级参考文献26

  • 1Hodge KK, McNeal JE, Terris MK, Stamey TA. Random systematic versus directed ultrasound guided transrectal core biopsies of the prostate. J Urol1989; 142:71-4.
  • 2Clements R, Aideyan OU, Griffiths G J, Peeling WB. Side effects and patient acceptability of transrectal biopsy of the prostate. Clin Radiol1993; 47: 125-6.
  • 3Collins GN, Lloyd SN, Hehir M, McKelvie GB. Multiple transrectal ultrasound-guided prostatic biopsies--true morbidity and patient acceptance. Br J Urol 1993;71: 460-3.
  • 4Noh DH, Cho MC, Park HK, Lee HW, Lee KS. The effects of combination perianal-intrarectal lidocaine-prilocaine cream and periprostatic nerve block for pain control during transrectal ultrasound guided biopsy of the prostate: a randomized, controlled trial. Korean J Urol 2010; 51: 463.
  • 5Turgut A, Ergun E, Kosar U, Kosar P, Ozcan A. Sedation as an alternative method to lessen patient discomfort due to transrectal ultrasonography-guided prostate biopsy. Eur J Radiol 2006; 57: 148-53.
  • 6Cesur M, Yapanoglu T, Erdem AF, Ozbey I, Alici HA etal, Caudal analgesia for prostate biopsy. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 2010; 54: 557-61.
  • 7Peters JL, Thompson AC, McNicholas TA, Hines JE, Hanbury DC et aL Increased patient satisfaction from transrectal ultrasonography and biopsy under sedation. BJU Int2001; 87: 827-30.
  • 8Kenny GN, White M. Intravenous propofol anaesthesia using a computerised infusion system. Anaesthesia 1991; 46: 156-7.
  • 9Park JY, Park S J, Choi SU, Shin HW, Lee HW etal. Target-controlled propofol infusion for sedation in patients undergoing transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy. J Int Med Res 2007; 35: 773-80.
  • 10Shrimali P, Shandari Y, Kharbanda B, Patil M, Srinivas V etal. Transrectal ultrasound- guided prostatic biopsy: midazolam, the ideal analgesic. Urol Int2009; 83: 333-6.

共引文献45

同被引文献46

引证文献16

二级引证文献63

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部