Fabio Zattoni , Pawel Rajwa , Marcin Miszczyk , Tamás Fazekas , Filippo Carletti , Salvatore Carrozza , Francesca Sattin , Giuseppe Reitano , Simone Botti , Akihiro Matsukawa , Fabrizio Dal Moro , R. Jeffrey Karnes , Alberto Briganti , Giacomo Novara , Shahrokh F. Shariat , Guillaume Ploussard , Giorgio Gandaglia
{"title":"Transperineal Versus Transrectal Magnetic Resonance Imaging–targeted Prostate Biopsy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Prospective Studies","authors":"Fabio Zattoni , Pawel Rajwa , Marcin Miszczyk , Tamás Fazekas , Filippo Carletti , Salvatore Carrozza , Francesca Sattin , Giuseppe Reitano , Simone Botti , Akihiro Matsukawa , Fabrizio Dal Moro , R. Jeffrey Karnes , Alberto Briganti , Giacomo Novara , Shahrokh F. Shariat , Guillaume Ploussard , Giorgio Gandaglia","doi":"10.1016/j.euo.2024.07.009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background and objective</h3><div>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).</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>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.</div></div><div><h3>Key findings and limitations</h3><div>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.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions and clinical implications</h3><div>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.</div></div><div><h3>Patient summary</h3><div>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.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":12256,"journal":{"name":"European urology oncology","volume":"7 6","pages":"Pages 1303-1312"},"PeriodicalIF":9.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European urology oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2588931124001822","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/8/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
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.
期刊介绍:
Journal Name: European Urology Oncology
Affiliation: Official Journal of the European Association of Urology
Focus:
First official publication of the EAU fully devoted to the study of genitourinary malignancies
Aims to deliver high-quality research
Content:
Includes original articles, opinion piece editorials, and invited reviews
Covers clinical, basic, and translational research
Publication Frequency: Six times a year in electronic format