Is There an Impact of Transperineal Versus Transrectal Magnetic Resonance Imaging-targeted Biopsy in Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer Detection Rate? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.


Journal

European urology oncology
ISSN: 2588-9311
Titre abrégé: Eur Urol Oncol
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 101724904

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Dec 2023
Historique:
received: 25 07 2023
revised: 02 08 2023
accepted: 11 08 2023
medline: 4 12 2023
pubmed: 28 8 2023
entrez: 27 8 2023
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

It is unclear whether a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-targeted transperineal (TP) biopsy can improve the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa). To compare the MRI-targeted TP and transrectal (TR) approaches for csPCa detection. A literature search was conducted using the PubMed/Medline, Embase, and Web of Science databases to identify reports published until February 2023. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines were followed to identify eligible studies. The primary outcome was the detection of csPCa (Gleason grade group ≥2). Sensitivity analyses were performed to investigate csPCa detection rates according to tumor location, Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) score, and type of fusion (cognitive or software based). Eleven studies met our inclusion criteria, and data from 3522 and 5140 patients who underwent, respectively, TR and TP MRI-targeted biopsies were reviewed. No statistically significant difference in the detection of csPCa was observed between the TR and TP approaches (odds ratio [OR] 1.11, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.98-1.25; p = 0.1). When stratifying patients according to lesion location, the TP approach was associated with higher csPCa detection in case of anterior (OR 2.17, 95% CI 1.46-3.22; p < 0.001) and apical (OR 1.86, 95% CI 1.14-3.03; p = 0.01) lesions. In the subgroup analysis based on PI-RADS score, the TP approach was associated with higher csPCa detection (OR 1.57, 95% CI 1.07-2.29; p = 0.02) in PI-RADS 4 lesions. Conversely, no difference was found in PI-RADS 3 and 5 lesions (p > 0.05). The main limitation was the retrospective design of most included studies. No significant association was found between the prostate biopsy approach and csPCa detection rate when we considered all biopsy indications. The TP approach provides a detection advantage in anterior and apical tumors, arguing for a preferred use of the TP approach in these lesion locations. The transperineal magnetic resonance imaging-targeted prostate biopsy approach appears to be more effective only for selected lesions. No clear benefit was seen for the transperineal approach in the overall population.

Identifiants

pubmed: 37634971
pii: S2588-9311(23)00164-5
doi: 10.1016/j.euo.2023.08.001
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Meta-Analysis Systematic Review Journal Article Review

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

621-628

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2023 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Auteurs

Alessandro Uleri (A)

Department of Urology, Fundació Puigvert, Autonoma University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain; Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Milan, Italy. Electronic address: alessandrouleri@outlook.it.

Michael Baboudjian (M)

Department of Urology, APHM, North Academic Hospital, Marseille, France.

Alessandro Tedde (A)

Department of Urology, Fundació Puigvert, Autonoma University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.

Andrea Gallioli (A)

Department of Urology, Fundació Puigvert, Autonoma University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.

Thibaut Long-Depaquit (T)

Department of Urology, APHM, North Academic Hospital, Marseille, France.

Joan Palou (J)

Department of Urology, Fundació Puigvert, Autonoma University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.

Giuseppe Basile (G)

Department of Urology, Fundació Puigvert, Autonoma University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain; Department of Urology, Urological Research Institute, IRCCS San Raffaele Hospital, Milan, Italy.

Josep Maria Gaya (JM)

Department of Urology, Fundació Puigvert, Autonoma University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.

Francesco Sanguedolce (F)

Department of Urology, Fundació Puigvert, Autonoma University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.

Giovanni Lughezzani (G)

Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Milan, Italy; Department of Urology IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital Rozzano Milan Italy.

Pawel Rajwa (P)

Department of Urology, Medical University of Silesia, Zabrze, Poland; Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.

Benjamin Pradere (B)

Department of Urology, La Croix du Sud Hôpital, Quint Fonsegrives, France.

Morgan Roupret (M)

GRC 5 Predictive Onco-Uro, Department of Urology, AP-HP, Pitié Salpétrière Hospital, Sorbonne University, Paris, France.

Alberto Briganti (A)

Department of Urology, Urological Research Institute, IRCCS San Raffaele Hospital, Milan, Italy.

Guillaume Ploussard (G)

Department of Urology, La Croix du Sud Hôpital, Quint Fonsegrives, France.

Alberto Breda (A)

Department of Urology, Fundació Puigvert, Autonoma University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH