摘要目的 系统性比较了经直肠(transrectal, TR)和经会阴(transperineal, TP)前列腺活检对于前列腺癌的诊断价值。方法 通过检索Pubmed、Embase、Web of science、知网和百度学术等数据库,筛选出直到2018-10的可用研究,并对纳入本研究的5篇文献进行Meta分析,计算95%的置信区间内合并的比值比,用来评估TR和TP在前列腺癌检出率方面的差异。本文共纳入了1561例患者,随机分为TR和TP组。结果 Meta分析显示,接受TP前列腺活检的患者与TR组比较,前列腺癌检出率没有显著改善 (OR=1.09, 95% CI 0.95~1.25)。对于血清前列腺特异性抗原(PSA)水平,两组之间也没有统计学差异 (OR=-0.13, 95% CI -0.71~0.45)。对于前列腺体积,两组之间存在统计学差异(OR=-3.28, 95% CI -6.40~-0.6)。结论 meta分析显示TR和经TP活检对前列腺癌的检出率没有统计学差异。
Abstract：Objective To assess the efficacy of transrectal (TR) vs transperineal (TP) prostate biopsy in the diagnosis of prostate cancer.Methods Such databases as PubMed,Embase, Web of Science, CNKI and Baidu Scholar were searched systematically. The meta-analysis was conducted using the Review manager 5.3 software. The odds ratio of the combined 95% confidence interval was calculated to assess the difference in detection rates of prostate cancer between the rectal (TR) and perineal (TP) groups. A total of 1561 patients were enrolled and randomized to the rectal (TR) and perineal (TP) groups.Results Finally, five studies were included in the meta-analysis. The results showed that no significant difference was found in the detection rate of prostate cancer (OR=1.09, 95% CI 0.95-1.25) or PSA levels (OR=-0.13, 95% CI -0.71－0.45). However, in terms of the prostate volume, there was significant difference between the two groups(OR=-3.28, 95% CI -6.40－-0.6).Conclusions There is no statistically significant difference in the PCA detection rate between TP prostate biopsy and TR prostate biopsy.
王涛, 王群锁, 王松涛. 经直肠和经会阴活检对前列腺癌诊断价值的Meta分析[J]. 武警医学, 2019, 30(6): 469-471.
WANG Tao, WANG Qunsuo, WANG Songtao. Meta-analysis of transrectal and transperineal prostate biopsy for diagnosis of prostate cancer. Med. J. Chin. Peop. Armed Poli. Forc., 2019, 30(6): 469-471.
Schroder F H, Hugosson J, Roobol M J, et al. Screening and prostate-cancer mortality in a randomized European study[J]. N Engl J Med, 2009, 360(13):1320-1328.
[2]
Hodge K K, McNeal J E, Terris M K, et al. Random systematic versus directed ultrasound guided transrectal core biopsies of the prostate[J]. J Urol, 1989, 142(1):71-75.
[3]
Heidenreich A, Bastian P J, Bellmunt J, et al. EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. part 1: screening, diagnosis, and local treatment with curative intent-update 2013 [J]. Eur Urol, 2014, 65(1):124-137.
[4]
Guo L H, Wu R, Xu H X, et al. Comparison between ultrasound guided transperineal and transrectal prostate biopsy: a prospective, randomized, and controlled trial [J]. Sci Rep, 2015, 5:16089.
[5]
Cerruto M A, Vianello F, D’Elia C, et al. Transrectal versus transperineal 14-core prostate biopsy in detection of prostate cancer: a comparative evaluation at the same institution [J]. Arch Ital Urol Androl, 2014, 86(4):284-287.
[6]
Miano R, D Nunzio C, Kim F J, et al. Transperineal versus transrectal prostate biopsy for predicting the final laterality of prostate cancer: are they reliable enough to select patients for focal therapy? Results from a multicenter international study [J]. Int Braz J Urol, 2014, 40(1):16-22.
[7]
Takenaka A, Hara R, Ishimura T, et al. A prospective randomized comparison of diagnostic efficacy between transperineal and transrectal 12-core prostate biopsy [J]. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis, 2008, 11(2):134-138.
[8]
Kawakami S, Yamamoto S, Numao N, et al Direct comparison between transrectal and transperineal extended prostate biopsy for the detection of cancer [J]. Int J Urol, 2007,14(8):719-724.
[9]
Hara R, Jo Y, Fujii T, et al. Optimal approach for prostate cancer detection as initial biopsy: prospective randomized study comparing transperineal versus transrectal systematic 12-core biopsy [J]. Urology, 2008, 71(2):191-195.
[10]
Scattoni V, Maccagnano C, Capitanio U, et al. Random biopsy: when, how many and where to take the cores?[J]. World J Urol, 2014, 32(4):859-869.
[11]
Carter H B. American Urological Association (AUA) guideline on prostate cancer detection: process and rationale [J]. BJU Int, 2013, 112(5):543-547.
[12]
Shen P F, Zhu Y C, Wei W R, et al. The results of transperineal versus transrectal prostate biopsy: a systematic review and meta-analysis [J]. Asian J Androl, 2012, 14(2):310-315.
[13]
Nakaoka H, Inoue I. Meta-analysis of genetic association studies: methodologies, between-study heterogeneity and winner’s curse [J]. J Hum Genet, 2009, 54(11):615-623.
2019, Vol. 30 
