본문으로 건너뛰기
← 뒤로

The Evolution of Prostate Biopsy: A Retrospective Comparison of Transperineal and Transrectal Approaches Under Local Anaesthesia.

코호트 1/5 보강
Cureus 📖 저널 OA 99.9% 2021: 42/43 OA 2022: 79/79 OA 2023: 181/181 OA 2024: 284/284 OA 2025: 774/774 OA 2026: 506/506 OA 2021~2026 2026 Vol.18(2) p. e103547 OA
Retraction 확인
출처

PICO 자동 추출 (휴리스틱, conf 2/4)

유사 논문
P · Population 대상 환자/모집단
110 patients (55 LATP, 55 TRUS).
I · Intervention 중재 / 시술
추출되지 않음
C · Comparison 대조 / 비교
추출되지 않음
O · Outcome 결과 / 결론
No statistically significant difference was found in detection rates or complications. Conclusion LATP is safe when compared to TRUS in all aspects of procedure tolerability, complications, and cancer detection rate.

Lim P, Dosanjh A, Ali M, Mohammed M, Kodera A, Gallagher W

📝 환자 설명용 한 줄

Background and objective First-line tissue sampling for prostate cancer can be performed using either transrectal ultrasound biopsy (TRUS) or local anaesthetic transperineal biopsy (LATP).

🔬 핵심 임상 통계 (초록에서 자동 추출 — 원문 검증 권장)
  • 연구 설계 cohort study

이 논문을 인용하기

↓ .bib ↓ .ris
APA Lim P, Dosanjh A, et al. (2026). The Evolution of Prostate Biopsy: A Retrospective Comparison of Transperineal and Transrectal Approaches Under Local Anaesthesia.. Cureus, 18(2), e103547. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.103547
MLA Lim P, et al.. "The Evolution of Prostate Biopsy: A Retrospective Comparison of Transperineal and Transrectal Approaches Under Local Anaesthesia.." Cureus, vol. 18, no. 2, 2026, pp. e103547.
PMID 41841093 ↗

Abstract

Background and objective First-line tissue sampling for prostate cancer can be performed using either transrectal ultrasound biopsy (TRUS) or local anaesthetic transperineal biopsy (LATP). The aim of this study is to compare these two techniques, examining outcomes of procedure tolerability, complications and cancer detection rate. Methods A retrospective, single-centre cohort study of patients undergoing prostate biopsy was performed. A telephone questionnaire was completed 72 hours post-biopsy, focusing on pain scores and complications. Cancer detection rates were also recorded. Results This study included 110 patients (55 LATP, 55 TRUS). Clinical data examining age, digital rectal examination findings, prostate-specific antigen (PSA), PSA density, prostate volume and prostate imaging reporting and data system (PI-RADS) score were gathered. Tolerability in both LATP and TRUS was similar. The median pain score on ultrasound probe use and biopsy gun deployment was marginally higher in the TRUS group. Difficulty passing urine occurred in 9% of LATP and 16% of TRUS (p=0.3916). Haematuria was seen in 58% of LATP and 73% of TRUS (p=0.1600). No patient required hospital admission. Cancer detection rates for LATP versus TRUS were 58.2% and 47.3%, respectively, (p = 0.3397) with higher LATP detection also seen in isolated PI-RADS 4/5 cases (p=0.2270). No statistically significant difference was found in detection rates or complications. Conclusion LATP is safe when compared to TRUS in all aspects of procedure tolerability, complications, and cancer detection rate.

🏷️ 키워드 / MeSH 📖 같은 키워드 OA만

같은 제1저자의 인용 많은 논문 (1)

🏷️ 같은 키워드 · 무료전문 — 이 논문 MeSH/keyword 기반

🟢 PMC 전문 열기