Suppr超能文献

经会阴与经直肠前列腺活检方法在前列腺癌诊断中的疗效与安全性比较:一项系统评价与Meta分析

Comparing the Efficacy and Safety of the Transperineal Versus Transrectal Prostate Biopsy Approach in the Diagnosis of Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

作者信息

Abdulrasheed Habeeb, George Althea O, Ayobami-Ojo Petra S, Rai Pratik, Nwachukwu Nwachukwu O, Ajimoti Aisha, Alawadi Abdulla, Iftikhar Cinzia Z, Mehreen Aaisha, Mbisa Asante

机构信息

Urology, University Hospital Birmingham, Birmingham, GBR.

Urology, The Royal London Hospital, London, GBR.

出版信息

Cureus. 2024 Dec 10;16(12):e75459. doi: 10.7759/cureus.75459. eCollection 2024 Dec.

Abstract

Prostate cancer (PCa) has high prevalence rates in men and is a leading cause of cancer-related death. Transrectal (TR) biopsy has traditionally been the gold standard for diagnosis, but transperineal (TP) biopsy is increasingly favoured due to its lower infection risk. However, debate remains regarding which method has superior cancer detection rates. This review compares the efficacy and safety of the TP as compared to the TR prostate biopsy approach, summarizing the largest body of evidence available to date. A literature search was performed on the PubMed, Google Scholar, Cochrane Library, and Embase databases. We searched from the inception of the databases up to August 2024 for relevant studies comparing the cancer detection rate of TP versus TR prostate biopsy and compared their complication rates. Twenty-one studies met the inclusion criteria. The pooled odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals were calculated to evaluate the differences between the TR and TP groups in the PCa detection rate. This meta-analysis included 21 studies (6 randomized control trials and 15 cohort studies) with a total of 13,818 patients (TP = 7917; TR = 5901), who were accrued between 2008 and 2024 and divided into the TR group and the TP group. The analysis revealed no significant difference in prostate cancer detection rates between the TP and TR approaches in both RCTs (OR 1.02, 95% CI (0.74, 1.41), p = 0.90) and cohort studies (OR 1.07, 95% CI (0.85, 1.35), p = 0.36). Complication profiles were largely comparable; TP demonstrated a significantly lower risk of urinary tract infections (OR 0.26, 95% CI (0.11, 0.61)) but no notable differences in acute urinary retention, haematuria, or rectal bleeding. Our findings advocate the TP approach as a safer biopsy alternative where feasible, particularly in infection-sensitive populations, without compromising diagnostic accuracy. MRI should complement biopsy strategies to enhance diagnostic precision. Future research should focus on standardized, large-scale RCTs to further refine and personalize prostate cancer diagnostic pathways.

摘要

前列腺癌(PCa)在男性中发病率很高,是癌症相关死亡的主要原因。经直肠(TR)活检传统上一直是诊断的金标准,但由于经会阴(TP)活检感染风险较低,越来越受到青睐。然而,关于哪种方法具有更高的癌症检出率仍存在争议。本综述比较了TP与TR前列腺活检方法的有效性和安全性,总结了迄今为止最大规模的可用证据。在PubMed、谷歌学术、Cochrane图书馆和Embase数据库上进行了文献检索。我们从数据库建立至2024年8月搜索了比较TP与TR前列腺活检癌症检出率的相关研究,并比较了它们的并发症发生率。21项研究符合纳入标准。计算了95%置信区间的合并比值比,以评估TR组和TP组在PCa检出率上的差异。这项荟萃分析包括21项研究(6项随机对照试验和15项队列研究),共有13818例患者(TP组 = 7917例;TR组 = 5901例),这些患者在2008年至2024年期间入组,并分为TR组和TP组。分析显示,在随机对照试验(OR 1.02,95% CI(0.74,1.41),p = 0.90)和队列研究(OR 1.07,95% CI(0.85,1.35),p = 0.36)中,TP和TR方法在前列腺癌检出率上均无显著差异。并发症情况在很大程度上具有可比性;TP显示出尿路感染风险显著较低(OR 0.26,95% CI(0.11,0.61)),但在急性尿潴留、血尿或直肠出血方面无显著差异。我们的研究结果支持在可行的情况下,将TP方法作为一种更安全的活检替代方法,特别是在对感染敏感的人群中,且不影响诊断准确性。MRI应补充活检策略以提高诊断精度。未来的研究应聚焦于标准化、大规模的随机对照试验,以进一步优化和个性化前列腺癌诊断途径。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5675/11716271/acb9eee71c2c/cureus-0016-00000075459-i01.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验