Cerruto Maria Angela, Vianello Fabio, D'Elia Carolina, Artibani Walter, Novella Giovanni
Department of Surgery, Urology Clinic, AOUI Verona.
Arch Ital Urol Androl. 2014 Dec 30;86(4):284-7. doi: 10.4081/aiua.2014.4.284.
The ideal bioptic strategy for CaP detection is still to be completely defined. The aim of our study is to compare transperineal (TP) and transrectal (TR) approaches, in a 14-core initial prostate biopsy for CaP detection.
A prospective controlled study was conducted enrolling 108 consecutive patients with a PSA level greater than 4 ng/mL and/or an abnormal DRE. TR versus TP 14-core initial prostatic biopsies were performed on 54 and 54 patients, respectively, with a randomisation ratio of 1:1.
The cancer detection rates were 46.29 (25 out of 54 patients), and 44.44% (24 out of 54 patients), respectively, using the TR or the TP approach (p = 0.846). The overall cancer core rate was significantly higher when the TP approach was used: 21.43% (162 out of 756 cores) and 16.79% (127 out of 756 cores), with the TP and the TR approach, respectively (p = 0.022). The cores were significantly longer performing TP approach: at the site "1" (14.92 versus 12.97 mm, p = 0.02); at "5" (15.53 versus 13.69 mm, p = 0.037); at "7" (15.06 versus 12.86 mm, p = 0.001); at "9" (14.92 versus 13.38 mm, p = 0.038); at "11" (16.32 versus 12.31 mm, p = 0.0001); at "12" (15.14 versus 12.19 mm, p = 0.0001); at "13" (17.49 versus 13.98 mm, p = 0.0001); at "14" (16.77 versus 13.36 mm, p = 0.0001). As to the biopsy related pain, the mean pain level perceived by patients during the TR approach was 1.56 ± 1.73 versus 1.42 ± 1.37 registered during TP approach (p = 0.591).
No significant differences were found in cancer detection rate, cancer core rate between TP and TR approaches for prostatic biopsy. Even in terms of complication rate or pain level, it cannot be concluded that one procedure is superior to the other one. Apparently, strictly following our protocol, TP approach seems to offer a better sampling at the level of the apex and the TZ, however without adding any significant advantage in terms of overall cancer detection rate.
用于前列腺癌(CaP)检测的理想活检策略仍有待完全确定。我们研究的目的是在14针初始前列腺活检中比较经会阴(TP)和经直肠(TR)途径用于CaP检测的情况。
进行了一项前瞻性对照研究,连续纳入108例前列腺特异性抗原(PSA)水平大于4 ng/mL和/或直肠指检(DRE)异常的患者。分别对54例患者进行TR和TP 14针初始前列腺活检,随机化比例为1:1。
采用TR或TP途径时,癌症检出率分别为46.29%(54例患者中的25例)和44.44%(54例患者中的24例)(p = 0.846)。采用TP途径时,总体癌灶针数率显著更高:TP和TR途径分别为21.43%(756针中的162针)和16.79%(756针中的127针)(p = 0.022)。TP途径获取的针显著更长:在部位“1”(14.92对12.97 mm,p = 0.02);在“5”(15.53对13.69 mm,p = 0.037);在“7”(15.06对12.86 mm,p = 0.001);在“9”(14.92对13.38 mm,p = 0.038);在“11”(16.32对12.31 mm,p = 0.0001);在“12”(15.14对12.19 mm,p = 0.0001);在“13”(17.49对13.98 mm,p = 0.0001);在“14”(16.77对13.36 mm,p = 0.0001)。关于活检相关疼痛,患者在TR途径期间感知的平均疼痛水平为1.56±1.73,而在TP途径期间为1.42±1.37(p = 0.591)。
在前列腺活检的TR和TP途径之间,癌症检出率、癌灶针数率未发现显著差异。即使在并发症发生率或疼痛水平方面,也不能得出一种方法优于另一种方法的结论。显然,严格遵循我们的方案,TP途径似乎在尖部和移行带水平提供了更好的取材,但在总体癌症检出率方面没有增加任何显著优势。