title: The results of transperineal versus transrectal prostate biopsy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
abstract: This systematic review was performed to compare the efficacy and complications of transperineal (TP) vs. transrectal (TR) prostate biopsy. A systematic research of PUBMED, 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 case-control 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.
authors.affiliation: Department of Urology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, China.
authors.forename: Peng-Fei
authors.initials: PF
authors.lastname: Shen
authors.forename: Yu-Chun
authors.initials: YC
authors.lastname: Zhu
authors.forename: Wu-Ran
authors.initials: WR
authors.lastname: Wei
authors.forename: Yong-Zhong
authors.initials: YZ
authors.lastname: Li
authors.forename: Jie
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Yang
authors.forename: Yu-Tao
authors.initials: YT
authors.lastname: Li
authors.forename: Ding-Ming
authors.initials: DM
authors.lastname: Li
authors.forename: Jia
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Wang
authors.forename: Hao
authors.initials: H
authors.lastname: Zeng
mesh_terms: D001706:Biopsy / Q000009:adverse effects / Q000379:methods*; D051517:Digital Rectal Examination; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D010502:Perineum; D011467:Prostate / Q000473:pathology*; D017430:Prostate-Specific Antigen / Q000097:blood; D011471:Prostatic Neoplasms / Q000097:blood / Q000175:diagnosis* / Q000473:pathology; D012007:Rectum
chemical_list: D017430:Prostate-Specific Antigen
references.citation: Asian J Androl. 2009 Nov;11(6):678-82
references.pmid: 19767761
references.citation: N Engl J Med. 2009 Mar 26;360(13):1310-9
references.pmid: 19297565
references.citation: N Engl J Med. 2009 Mar 26;360(13):1320-8
references.pmid: 19297566
references.citation: J Urol. 2001 May;165(5):1554-9
references.pmid: 11342916
references.citation: Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2008;11(2):134-8
references.pmid: 17533394
references.citation: Int J Urol. 2001 Jun;8(6):301-7
references.pmid: 11389746
references.citation: Eur Urol. 2010 Dec;58(6):851-64
references.pmid: 20884114
references.citation: Int J Urol. 2007 Aug;14(8):719-24
references.pmid: 17681062
references.citation: Asian J Androl. 2009 Jan;11(1):74-80
references.pmid: 19050692
references.citation: Urology. 2000 Oct 1;56(4):617-21
references.pmid: 11018617
references.citation: Asian J Androl. 2011 Sep;13(5):724-7
references.pmid: 21623389
references.citation: Urology. 2008 Feb;71(2):191-5
references.pmid: 18308081
references.citation: Urology. 2003 May;61(5):961-6
references.pmid: 12736016
references.citation: Int J Urol. 2005 Nov;12(11):959-63
references.pmid: 16351651
references.citation: J Urol. 1989 Jul;142(1):71-4; discussion 74-5
references.pmid: 2659827
references.citation: Clin Radiol. 2006 Feb;61(2):142-53
references.pmid: 16439219
references.citation: Eur Urol. 2007 Nov;52(5):1309-22
references.pmid: 17720304
references.citation: Urology. 2011 Apr;77(4):921-5
references.pmid: 21131034
references.citation: Urology. 1998 Oct;52(4):644-6
references.pmid: 9763086
references.citation: Asian J Androl. 2008 Mar;10(2):325-31
references.pmid: 18097514
references.citation: J Urol. 2001 Sep;166(3):845-50
references.pmid: 11490231