Magnetic Resonance Imaging/Ultrasound Fusion-guided Transperineal Versus Magnetic Resonance Imaging/Ultrasound Fusion-guided Transrectal Prostate Biopsy-A Systematic Review

Context: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-targeted biopsies have changed the dogma in prostate cancer diagnosis. Biopsies can be performed either transrectally (MRI-guided and transrectal ultrasound fusion transrectal biopsy [MRI-TRUSB]) or transperineally (MRI-guided and transrectal ultrasound fusion transperineal biopsy [MRI-TPB]). Objective: To evaluate the detection and complication rates of MRI-TRUSB and MRI-TPB. Evidence acquisition: We performed a literature search in PubMed, Scopus, EMBASE, and CENTRAL, and selected randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies comparing MRI-TRUSB versus MRI-TPB. Evidence synthesis: Our search identified 3608 studies; we included five in the qualitative and two in the quantitative synthesis. On per-patient pooled analysis for clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa), MRI-TPB detection rates were significantly higher (relative risk 1.28 [95% confidence interval {CI} 1.03-1.60], p = 0.03). On a per-lesion analysis, MRI-TPB anterior csPCa detection rates were statistically significantly higher (relative risk 2.46 [95% CI 1.22-4.98], p = 0.01). On a per-lesion analysis, MRI-TPB and MRI-TRUSB overall cancer detection rates were 75% and 81.6% (p = 0.53), and csPCa detection rates were 65.7% and 75.5% (p = 0.40), respectively. MRI-TPB had lower complication rates (odds ratio 2.56 [95% CI 1.14-5.56, p < 0.05]). On Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) evaluation, we rated all outcomes as very low certainty of the evidence for all outcome measures. Conclusions: This review highlights the paucity of good-quality evidence comparing MRI-TPB and MRI-TRUSB. MRI-TPB achieves better detection for csPCa, anterior tumors, and lower infective complications. While RCTs are the highest quality of evidence that can address existing evidence limitations, there are concerns regarding infective complications associated with the MRI-TRUSB. Therefore, the authors propose that researchers and clinicians adopt a pragmatic approach by maintaining prospective databases, internal auditing of the MRI-TPB approach, and comparing these data with historical MRI-TRUSB cohorts. Patient summary: We looked at the outcomes by comparing magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-guided and transrectal ultrasound fusion transrectal biopsy with MRI-guided and transrectal ultrasound fusion transperineal biopsy (TPB). The analysis suggests, based on very low certaintyevidence, that MRI-TPB has better detection for clinically significant prostate cancer, anterior tumors, and lower complications. (C) 2021 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Automated summary

This study compared the outcomes of MRI-guided and transrectal ultrasound fusion transrectal biopsy (TRUSB) with MRI-guided and transrectal ultrasound fusion transperineal biopsy (TPB). The analysis suggests that TPB has better detection for clinically significant prostate cancer, anterior tumors, and lower complications, although the evidence certainty is low.