Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42652107›Full record

ReviewBiomedicines2026

Transperineal Versus Transrectal Prostate Biopsy in the MRI-Targeted Era: A Contemporary Narrative Review.

Silviu Latcu, Flaviu Lucian Petrica, Dorin Novacescu, Roland Costica, Vlad Dema, Victor Pasecinic, Ionel Chiriac, Mihai Baghina, Radu Caprariu, Radu Dragomir and 2 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Biomedicines, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Silviu LatcuBastion Policlinic, Mircea cel Batran Street, No. 122C, 300600 Timisoara, Romania.
Flaviu Lucian PetricaBastion Policlinic, Mircea cel Batran Street, No. 122C, 300600 Timisoara, Romania.
Dorin NovacescuBastion Policlinic, Mircea cel Batran Street, No. 122C, 300600 Timisoara, Romania.ORCID 0000-0002-2520-7636
Roland CosticaBastion Policlinic, Mircea cel Batran Street, No. 122C, 300600 Timisoara, Romania.
Vlad DemaBastion Policlinic, Mircea cel Batran Street, No. 122C, 300600 Timisoara, Romania.ORCID 0009-0008-0140-701X
Victor PasecinicBastion Policlinic, Mircea cel Batran Street, No. 122C, 300600 Timisoara, Romania.
Ionel ChiriacBastion Policlinic, Mircea cel Batran Street, No. 122C, 300600 Timisoara, Romania.
Mihai BaghinaBastion Policlinic, Mircea cel Batran Street, No. 122C, 300600 Timisoara, Romania.
Radu CaprariuDepartment XV, Discipline of Radiology and Medical Imaging, Victor Babes University of Medicine and Pharmacy Timisoara, E. Murgu Square, No. 2, 300041 Timisoara, Romania.
Radu DragomirDepartment of Oncology, Victor Babes University of Medicine and Pharmacy Timisoara, E. Murgu Square, No. 2, 300041 Timisoara, Romania.ORCID 0000-0002-5994-9160
Razvan BoboraDoctoral School, Victor Babes University of Medicine and Pharmacy Timisoara, E. Murgu Square, No. 2, 300041 Timisoara, Romania.ORCID 0009-0000-5635-2345
Alin CumpanasDepartment XV, Discipline of Urology, Victor Babes University of Medicine and Pharmacy Timisoara, E. Murgu Square, No. 2, 300041 Timisoara, Romania.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Prostate biopsy is among the most frequently performed diagnostic procedures in men, and two shifts have reshaped it over the past decade: the incorporation of multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) with targeted sampling, and migration from the transrectal to the transperineal route. Because these changes are usually adopted together, the practical choice facing many units is between a contemporary transperineal MRI-targeted pathway and the historical transrectal systematic one. This narrative review weights cancer detection, procedure-related harms, and implementation approximately equally, drawing on evidence that isolates route from targeting wherever possible. Across randomized trials and meta-analyses, the two pathways achieve broadly comparable detection of clinically significant cancer (ISUP grade group ≥ 2), although the transperineal route samples anterior and apical tumors more effectively and the largest randomized comparison reported a modest transperineal advantage. The principal transperineal benefit is a marked reduction in infectious complications, enabling reduced antibiotic prophylaxis and improved stewardship; its main cost is greater procedural discomfort. We review mpMRI and PI-RADS with illustrative examples, fusion technique, cost-effectiveness, special populations, emerging adjuncts, and divergent guidelines, concluding that route and targeting decisions are best individualized, with infection risk and lesion location dominant.

Indexed as

biopsy complicationsclinically significant prostate cancerfusion biopsyMRI-targeted biopsymultiparametric MRIPI-RADSprostate biopsyprostate cancertransperineal biopsytransrectal biopsy

Identifiers

PMID42652107
PMCPMC13510208

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.