ArticleAsian journal of andrology2024
Transrectal versus transperineal prostate biopsy for cancer detection in patients with gray-zone prostate-specific antigen: a multicenter, real-world study.
Article in Asian journal of andrology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Is MRI/US-guided fusion biopsy ready to replace systematic biopsy in detecting clinically significant prostate carcinoma? - a retrospective study.BMC urology · 2026Article
- Comparison of prostate cancer detection rates and complications between transrectal ultrasound-guided transperineal and transrectal biopsies: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Translational andrology and urology · 2025Article
- Review
- Quality, reliability, and content analysis of YouTube videos on transperineal prostate biopsy.Digital healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Knowledge about the effect of different prostate biopsy approaches on the prostate cancer detection rate (CDR) in patients with gray-zone prostate-specific antigen (PSA) is limited. We performed this study to compare the CDR among patients who underwent different biopsy approaches and had rising PSA levels in the gray zone. Two hundred and twenty-two patients who underwent transrectal prostate biopsy (TRB) and 216 patients who underwent transperineal prostate biopsy (TPB) between June 2016 and September 2022 were reviewed in this study. In addition, 110 patients who received additional targeted biopsies following the systematic TPB were identified. Clinical parameters, including age, PSA derivative, prostate volume (PV), and needle core count, were recorded. The data were fitted via propensity score matching (PSM), adjusting for potential confounders. TPB outperformed TRB in terms of the CDR (49.6% vs 28.3%, P = 0.001). The clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) detection rate was not significantly different between TPB and TRB (78.6% vs 68.8%, P = 0.306). In stratified analysis, TPB outperformed TRB in CDR when the age of patients was 65-75 years (59.0% vs 22.0%, P < 0.001), when PV was 25.00-50.00 ml (63.2% vs 28.3%, P < 0.001), and when needle core count was no more than 12 (58.5% vs 31.5%, P = 0.005). The CDR ( P = 0.712) and detection rate of csPCa ( P = 0.993) did not significantly differ among the systematic, targeted, and combined biopsies. TPB outperformed TRB in CDR for patients with gray-zone PSA. Moreover, performing target biopsy after systematic TPB provided no additional benefits in CDR.
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.