ArticleCurrent health sciences journal
Transperineal versus Transrectal Prostate Biopsy: Comparative Analysis of Cancer Detection and Complication Rates.
Article in Current health sciences journal. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Prostate cancer is the most common malignancy in men, and systematic ultrasound-guided biopsy remains the diagnostic gold standard. The transrectal (TR) route, while widely used, carries an increased risk of infectious and haemorrhagic complications. The transperineal (TP) biopsy approach has been developed to reduce these risks while maintaining comparable diagnostic accuracy. This study aimed to compare cancer detection rates, histopathological patterns, and complication rates between TP and TR prostate biopsies.
methodsA retrospective analysis was conducted on 310 patients who underwent prostate biopsy between January 2023 and January 2024. Patients were divided into TP (n=178) and TR (n=132) groups. Clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) was defined as Gleason score ≥7 or ISUP grade ≥2. Data regarding detection rates, ISUP distribution, complications, and age were compared using the Chi-square test. Age distribution and ISUP grade across age decades were evaluated to exclude age-related bias.
resultsThe overall cancer detection rate was significantly higher in the TP group (60.67%) than in the TR group (49.24%) (p=0.045), while csPCa detection did not differ significantly (TP 49.44% vs TR 43.94%, p=0.20). High-grade (ISUP 5) tumours were more frequent in the TR group (41.5% vs 25.0%, p=0.034). Complications were significantly more common after TR biopsy (15.2% vs 6.7%, p=0.027), with infections and rectal bleeding occurring only in TR cases. Patient age distribution was similar between groups (χ²=4.49, p=0.213), and ISUP grade distribution by age decade showed no significant differences (all p>0.05). No non-prostatic pathology was identified in either cohort.
conclusionsTransperineal prostate biopsy demonstrated a higher overall detection rate and significantly fewer complications compared to the transrectal approach, while maintaining equivalent detection of clinically significant prostate cancer. The absence of age-related or histological bias confirms that the lower complication rate of TP biopsy is attributable to the procedural route rather than patient-related factors.
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.