Hara Ryoei, Jo Yoshimasa, Fujii Tomohiro, Kondo Norio, Yokoyoma Teruhiko, Miyaji Yoshiyuki, Nagai Atsushi
Department of Urology, Kawasaki Medical School, Kurashiki, Japan.
Urology. 2008 Feb;71(2):191-5. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2007.09.029.
Transperineal and transrectal prostate biopsy are both used for prostate cancer detection. However, which approach is superior remains unknown. In this study, we performed a prospective randomized study to compare the efficacy of transperineal versus transrectal 12-core initial prostate biopsy.
From May 2003 to October 2005, a prospective randomized study of transperineal versus transrectal 12-core biopsy (126 and 120 patients, respectively) was conducted in 246 patients with a prostate-specific antigen level of 4.0 to 20.0 ng/mL. All procedures were performed with the patient in the lithotomy position, with the transperineal and transrectal approach performed with spinal anesthesia (0.5% bupivacaine) or a caudal block (1% lidocaine), respectively. With both approaches, eight biopsy specimens were obtained systematically from the peripheral zone, including the apex, and four from the transition zone.
The cancer detection rate was 42.1% (53 of 126 patients) with the transperineal approach and 48.3% (58 of 120 patients) with the transrectal approach (P = 0.323). For all patients undergoing transperineal and transrectal biopsy, the cancer core rate (cancer core number/biopsy core number) was 13.7% (207 of 1512 cores) and 14.4% (208 of 1440 cores), respectively (P = 0.566). Apart from headache, presumably related to the spinal anesthesia, no significant differences were found in the complications between the two groups.
No significant differences were found in the cancer detection rate, cancer core rate, or complications between the two approaches. We believe that the preferred approach as an initial prostate biopsy is the transrectal approach, which does not require spinal anesthesia or another burdensome process.
经会阴前列腺穿刺活检和经直肠前列腺穿刺活检均用于前列腺癌检测。然而,哪种方法更具优势尚不清楚。在本研究中,我们进行了一项前瞻性随机研究,以比较经会阴与经直肠12针初始前列腺穿刺活检的疗效。
2003年5月至2005年10月,对246例前列腺特异性抗原水平为4.0至20.0 ng/mL的患者进行了经会阴与经直肠12针穿刺活检(分别为126例和120例)的前瞻性随机研究。所有操作均在患者截石位下进行,经会阴途径采用脊髓麻醉(0.5%布比卡因),经直肠途径采用骶管阻滞(1%利多卡因)分别进行。两种方法均从外周区(包括尖部)系统获取8个活检标本,从移行区获取4个活检标本。
经会阴途径癌症检出率为42.1%(126例患者中的53例),经直肠途径为48.3%(120例患者中的58例)(P = 0.323)。对于所有接受经会阴和经直肠活检的患者,癌症芯针率(癌芯针数/活检芯针数)分别为13.7%(1512个芯针中的207个)和14.4%(1440个芯针中的208个)(P = 0.566)。除了可能与脊髓麻醉相关的头痛外,两组并发症无显著差异。
两种方法在癌症检出率、癌症芯针率或并发症方面均无显著差异,我们认为作为初始前列腺活检的首选方法是经直肠途径,其不需要脊髓麻醉或其他繁琐的操作。