ArticleProstate international2026
The accuracy of transperineal template-guided mapping biopsy in patients with negative magnetic resonance imaging.
Article in Prostate international, 2026. 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
Background: The aim of this study was to assess the diagnostic accuracy and spatial localization capability of transperineal template-guided mapping biopsy (TTMB) in the detection of prostate cancer in patients with negative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Materials and methods: A retrospective study was conducted to analyze the clinical data and follow-up outcomes of patients with negative MRI who underwent transperineal prostate biopsy at Northern Jiangsu People's Hospital, between January 2017 and August 2020. The patients were categorized into TTMB group and the systematic biopsy (SB) group according to the biopsy method. The biopsy positivity rate, detection rate of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa), pathological grade upgrading and downgrading following radical surgery, repeat biopsy rate, and positive rate of repeat biopsy were compared between the two patient groups. The diagnostic accuracy of TTMB in detecting and localizing prostate lesions was assessed using whole-mount radical prostatectomy specimens. Results: A total of 398 patients were enrolled in the study, of whom 185 were in the TTMB group and 213 in the SB group. The TTMB group had significantly higher biopsy cores (53.5 vs. 18.1), biopsy-positive rate [28.1% (52/185) vs. 15.5% (33/213)], and csPCa rate [15.7% (29/185) vs. 8.9% (19/213)] than the SB group. In radical prostatectomy, compared with SB, the pathological downgrade of TTMB was higher (36.4% vs. 19.2%), and the pathological upgrade was lower (6.8% vs. 30.8%). The incidence of hematuria (37.8%), perineal hematoma (34%), and urinary retention (11.9%) in TTMB is significantly higher than in SB ( Conclusions: TTMB enhances biopsy accuracy and facilitates more precise detection and evaluation of tumor lesions patients with negative MRI.
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.