Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36709292›Full record

ArticleBMC urology2023

Transrectal versus transperineal prostate biopsy in detection of prostate cancer: a retrospective study based on 452 patients.

Mengxin Lu, Yi Luo, Yongzhi Wang, Jingtian Yu, Hang Zheng, Zhonghua Yang

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC urology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
3.4field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. [Efficiency and safety of transperineal prostate biopsy with a single access point].Revista medica del Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social · 2026
    Observational
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Mengxin Lu *Department of Urology, Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, 169 Donghu Road, Wuchang District, Wuhan, 430071, Hubei, China.
Yi Luo *Department of Urology, Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, 169 Donghu Road, Wuchang District, Wuhan, 430071, Hubei, China.
Yongzhi WangDepartment of Urology, Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, 169 Donghu Road, Wuchang District, Wuhan, 430071, Hubei, China.
Jingtian YuDepartment of Urology, Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, 169 Donghu Road, Wuchang District, Wuhan, 430071, Hubei, China.
Hang ZhengDepartment of Urology, Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, 169 Donghu Road, Wuchang District, Wuhan, 430071, Hubei, China.
Zhonghua YangDepartment of Urology, Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, 169 Donghu Road, Wuchang District, Wuhan, 430071, Hubei, China. yangzhonghua@whu.edu.cn.
Wuhan University · CNZhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University · CN

Funding

Natural Science Foundation of Hubei Province 2019CFB505Program of Excellent Doctoral (Postdoctoral) of Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University ZNYB2019006
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTransrectal (TR) ultrasound guided prostate biopsy and transperineal (TP) ultrasound guided prostate biopsy are the two most commonly used methods to detect prostate cancer, the detection rate of the two biopsy approaches may differ in patients with different clinical characteristics. Here we aimed to compare the prostate cancer detection rate and positive rate of biopsy cores between TR and TP prostate biopsy in patients with different clinical characteristics.

methodsWe retrospectively analyzed and compared the clinical data of 452 patients underwent TR or TP prostate biopsy in our hospital from June 2017 to September 2021. And patients were stratified according to several clinical characteristic (serum PSA level, prostate volume, PSA density, T stage and ISUP grade), cancer detection rate and positive rate of biopsy cores were compared in different stratified groups.

resultsThere was no significant difference in age, PSA level, prostate volume, and PSA density between the TR and TP groups. TR group had a higher overall cancer detection rate and positive rate of biopsy cores than TP group. Further subgroup analysis showed that TR group had a higher cancer detection rate in patients with prostate volumes 30-80 mL, and that the TR group had a higher positive rate of biopsy cores among the patients with T3-T4 stages, while TP group had a higher positive rates of biopsy cores among the patients with T1-T2 stages. There were no significant differences between the TR and TP groups for each subgroup when stratified by PSA level, PSA density and ISUP grade.

conclusionsTR approach may have advantage in patients with prostate volumes 30-80 mL and T3-T4 stages, while TP approach may have advantage in patients with T1-T2 stages.

Indexed as

ProstateProstatic NeoplasmsBiopsyHumansImage-Guided BiopsyMaleProstate-Specific AntigenRectumRetrospective StudiesProstate-Specific AntigenCancer detection ratePositive rate of biopsy coresProstate cancerTransperineal biopsyTransrectal biopsy

Identifiers

PMID36709292
PMCPMC9883893
OpenAlexW4318323758

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.