ArticleProstate international2026
Transperineal versus transrectal magnetic resonance imaging-fusion ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy: a comparative analysis of cancer detection in patients with prior negative transrectal ultrasound scan biopsy.
Article in Prostate international, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Editorial comment: Magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound fusion-guided targeted biopsy and ultrasound-guided systematic biopsy for prior negative prostate biopsy: A meta-analysis.Indian journal of urology : IJU : journal of the Urological Society of IndiaArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To compare and identify factors associated with prostate cancer detection between transperineal (TP) and transrectal (TR) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-fusion ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy in patients with a prior negative transrectal ultrasound scan (TRUS) biopsy. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 362 patients with a prior negative TRUS-guided biopsy who underwent MRI-ultrasound fusion-guided prostate biopsy at King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital between 2015 and 2024 were retrospectively screened. Nineteen were excluded because of insufficient clinical or imaging data. Patients were categorized into two groups: transrectal biopsy (n = 86) and transperineal biopsy (n = 257). Cancer-detection rates, baseline characteristics, MRI parameters, and perioperative complications were compared between the two cohorts. Results: Baseline characteristics, including age, body mass index (BMI), total prostate-specific antigen (PSA), prostate volume, and PSA density, were generally comparable between the TP and TR biopsy groups, except for previous biopsy history and lesion size. The TP approach showed significantly higher detection rates for overall prostate cancer [57.2 % vs 40.7 %; odds ratio (OR): 1.95, 95 % confidence interval (CI): 1.19-3.20; Conclusion: Transperineal biopsy is the preferred approach for patients with a prior negative TRUS biopsy. Cancer detection was correlated with the transperineal approach, higher PI-RADS scores, clinical staging, and older age.
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.