ArticleBMJ open2023
Protocol of a multicentre randomised controlled trial assessing transperineal prostate biopsy to reduce infectiouscomplications.
Article in BMJ open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04815876 (Randomized Trial Comparing Transperineal vs. Transrectal MRI-targeted Prostate Biopsy; Randomized Controlled Trial Assessing Transperineal Prostate Biopsy to Reduce Infection Complications), which is not on this map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Randomized Trial Comparing Transperineal vs. Transrectal MRI-targeted Prostate Biopsy; Randomized Controlled Trial Assessing Transperineal Prostate Biopsy to Reduce Infection Complications
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Predictors of fluoroquinolone-resistant bacterial colonization prior to prostate biopsy: a secondary analysis of two randomized trials.Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases · 2026Trial
- Transperineal Versus Transrectal Magnetic Resonance Imaging-targeted and Systematic Prostate Biopsy to Prevent Infectious Complications: The PREVENT Randomized Trial.European urology · 2024Trial
- Comparison of Infectious Complications After Transrectal Prostate Biopsy Under Two Antibiotic Prophylaxis Regimens: Ceftriaxone Plus Cefixime Versus Ciprofloxacin Plus Gentamicin.International journal of urology : official journal of the Japanese Urological Association · 2026Article
- Transperineal prostate biopsy with freehand technique under local anaesthetic: A systematic review and meta-analysis.BJUI compass · 2025Review
- TRexit is going one step further.Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
20 authors at 10 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
introductionApproximately one million prostate biopsies are performed annually in the USA, and most are performed using a transrectal approach under local anaesthesia. The risk of postbiopsy infection is increasing due to increasing antibiotic resistance of rectal flora. Single-centre studies suggest that a clean, percutaneous transperineal approach to prostate biopsy may have a lower risk of infection. To date, there is no high-level evidence comparing transperineal versus transrectal prostate biopsy. We hypothesise that transperineal versus transrectal prostate biopsy under local anaesthesia has a significantly lower risk of infection, similar pain/discomfort levels and comparable detection of non-low-grade prostate cancer. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will perform a multicentre, prospective randomised clinical trial to compare transperineal versus transrectal prostate biopsy for elevated prostate-specific antigen in the first biopsy, prior negative biopsy and active surveillance biopsy setting. Prostate MRI will be performed prior to biopsy, and targeted biopsy will be conducted for suspicious MRI lesions in addition to systematic biopsy (12 cores). Approximately 1700 men will be recruited and randomised in a 1:1 ratio to transperineal versus transrectal biopsy. A streamlined design to collect data and to determine trial eligibility along with the two-stage consent process will be used to facilitate subject recruitment and retention. The primary outcome is postbiopsy infection, and secondary outcomes include other adverse events (bleeding, urinary retention), pain/discomfort/anxiety and critically, detection of non-low-grade (grade group ≥2) prostate cancer. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The Institutional Review Board of the Biomedical Research Alliance of New York approved the research protocol (protocol number #18-02-365, approved 20 April 2020). The results of the trial will be presented at scientific conferences and published in peer-reviewed medical journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04815876.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.