Research ArticleOriginal Article
Open Access

Transperineal versus transrectal multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging fusion targeted prostate biopsy

Danny Rabah, Waleed Al-Taweel, Farrukh Khan, Mostafa Arafa, Shahbaz Mehmood, Alaa Mokhtar and Karim Farhat
Saudi Medical Journal June 2021, 42 (6) 649-654; DOI: https://doi.org/10.15537/smj.2021.42.6.20200771

References

  1. 1.↵
    1. Borghesi M,
    2. Ahmed H,
    3. Nam R,
    4. Schaeffer E,
    5. Schiavina R,
    6. Taneja S, et al.
    Complications after systematic, random, and image-guided prostate biopsy. Eur Urol 2017; 71: 353–365.
    OpenUrl
  2. 2.↵
    1. Scherr DS,
    2. Eastham J,
    3. Ohori M,
    4. Scardino PT.
    Prostate biopsy techniques and indications: when, where, and how? Semin Urol Oncol 2002; 20: 18–31.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  3. 3.↵
    1. Walker JT,
    2. Singla N,
    3. Roehrborn CG.
    Reducing infectious complications following transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy: a systematic review. Rev Urol 2016; 18: 73–89.
    OpenUrl
  4. 4.↵
    1. Davis P,
    2. Paul E,
    3. Grummet J.
    Current practice of prostate biopsy in Australia and New Zealand: a survey. Urol Ann 2015; 7: 315–319.
    OpenUrl
  5. 5.↵
    1. Murphy DG,
    2. Grummet JP.
    Planning for the post-antibiotic era - why we must avoid TRUS-guided biopsy sampling. Nat Rev Urol 2016; 13: 559–560.
    OpenUrl
  6. 6.↵
    1. Heidenreich A,
    2. Bastian PJ,
    3. Bellmunt J,
    4. Bolla M,
    5. Joniau S,
    6. van der Kwast T, et al.
    EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. part 1: screening, diagnosis, and local treatment with curative intent-update 2013. Eur Urol 2014; 65: 124–137.
    OpenUrl
  7. 7.↵
    National Institutes of Health. Common terminology criteria for adverse events v4.0. Rockville (MD): Capital Technology Information Services, Inc; 2020.
  8. 8.↵
    1. Eskew LA,
    2. Bare RL,
    3. McCullough DL.
    Systematic 5 region prostate biopsy is superior to sextant method for diagnosing carcinoma of the prostate. J Urol 1997; 157: 199–202.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  9. 9.↵
    1. Shen PF,
    2. Zhu YC,
    3. Wei WR,
    4. Li YZ,
    5. Yang J,
    6. Li YT, et al.
    The results of transperineal versus transrectal prostate biopsy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Asian J Androl 2012; 14: 310–315.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  10. 10.↵
    1. Abdollah F,
    2. Novara G,
    3. Briganti A,
    4. Scattoni V,
    5. Raber M,
    6. Roscigno M, et al.
    Transrectal versus transperineal saturation rebiopsy of the prostate: is there a difference in cancer detection rate? Urology 2011; 77: 921–925.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  11. 11.↵
    1. Tewes S,
    2. Peters I,
    3. Tiemeyer A,
    4. Peperhove M,
    5. Hartung D,
    6. Pertschy S, et al.
    Evaluation of MRI/ultrasound fusion-guided prostate biopsy using transrectal and transperineal approaches. Biomed Res Int 2017; 2017: 2176471.
    OpenUrl
  12. 12.↵
    1. Guo LH,
    2. Wu R,
    3. Xu HX,
    4. Xu JM,
    5. Wu J,
    6. Wang S, et al.
    Comparison between ultrasound guided transperineal and transrectal prostate biopsy: a prospective, randomized, and controlled trial. Sci Rep 2015; 5: 16089.
    OpenUrl
  13. 13.↵
    1. Xue J,
    2. Qin Z,
    3. Cai H,
    4. Zhang C,
    5. Li X,
    6. Xu W, et al.
    Comparison between transrectal and transperineal prostate biopsy for detection of prostate cancer: a meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis. Oncotarget 2017; 8: 23322–23336.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  14. 14.↵
    1. Xiang J,
    2. Yan H,
    3. Li J,
    4. Wang X,
    5. Chen H,
    6. Zheng X.
    Transperineal versus transrectal prostate biopsy in the diagnosis of prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. World J Surg Oncol 2019; 17: 31.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  15. 15.↵
    1. Grummet J,
    2. Pepdjonovic L,
    3. Huang S,
    4. Anderson E,
    5. Hadaschik B.
    Transperineal vs. transrectal biopsy in MRI targeting. Transl Androl Urol 2017; 6: 368–375.
    OpenUrl
  16. 16.↵
    American Urological Association. Transperineal vs transrectal MRI/US fusion for prostate cancer detection. Chicago (IL):American Urological Association; 2019.
  17. 17.↵
    1. Jiang CY,
    2. Shen PF,
    3. Wang C,
    4. Gui HJ,
    5. Ruan Y,
    6. Zeng H, et al.
    Comparison of diagnostic efficacy between transrectal and transperineal prostate biopsy: a propensity score-matched study. Asian J Androl 2019; 21: 612–617.
    OpenUrl
  18. 18.↵
    1. de Gorski A,
    2. Rouprêt M,
    3. Peyronnet B,
    4. Le Cossec C,
    5. Granger B,
    6. Comperat E, et al.
    Accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound fusion targeted biopsies to diagnose clinically significant prostate cancer in enlarged compared to smaller prostates. J Urol 2015; 194: 669–673.
    OpenUrl
  19. 19.
    1. Barqawi AB,
    2. Krughoff KJ,
    3. Eid K.
    Current challenges in prostate cancer management and the rationale behind targeted focal therapy. Adv Urol 2012; 2012: 862639.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  20. 20.↵
    1. Tu X,
    2. Liu Z,
    3. Chang T,
    4. Qiu S,
    5. Xu H,
    6. Bao Y, et al.
    Transperineal magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy may perform better than transrectal route in the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Genitourin Cancer 2019; 17: e860–e870.
    OpenUrl
  21. 21.↵
    1. Young R,
    2. Norris B,
    3. Reeves F,
    4. Peters JS.
    A retrospective comparison of transrectal and transperineal prostate biopsies: experience of a single surgeon. J Endourol 2019; 33: 498–502.
    OpenUrl
  22. 22.↵
    1. Loeb S,
    2. van den Heuvel S,
    3. Zhu X,
    4. Bangma CH,
    5. Schröder FH,
    6. Roobol MJ.
    Infectious complications and hospital admissions after prostate biopsy in a European randomized trial. Eur Urol 2012; 61: 1110–1114.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  23. 23.
    1. Steensels D,
    2. Slabbaert K,
    3. De Wever L,
    4. Vermeersch P,
    5. Van Poppel H,
    6. Verhaegen J.
    Fluoroquinolone-resistant E. coli in intestinal flora of patients undergoing transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy--should we reassess our practices for antibiotic prophylaxis? Clin Microbiol Infect 2012; 18: 575–581.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  24. 24.
    1. Cussans A,
    2. Somani BK,
    3. Basarab A,
    4. Dudderidge TJ.
    The role of targeted prophylactic antimicrobial therapy before transrectal ultrasonography-guided prostate biopsy in reducing infection rates: a systematic review. BJU Int 2016; 117: 725–731.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  25. 25.↵
    1. Halpern JA,
    2. Sedrakyan A,
    3. Dinerman B,
    4. Hsu WC,
    5. Mao J,
    6. Hu JC.
    Indications, utilization and complications following prostate biopsy: New York State analysis. J Urol 2017; 197: 1020–1025.
    OpenUrl
  26. 26.↵
    1. Kravchick S,
    2. Peled R,
    3. Ben-Dor D,
    4. Dorfman D,
    5. Kesari D,
    6. Cytron S.
    Comparison of different local anesthesia techniques during TRUS-guided biopsies: a prospective pilot study. Urology 2005; 65: 109–113.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
Back to top

In this issue

Print
Download PDF
Email Article
Citation Tools
Bookmark this article

Jump to section

Keywords