经会阴前列腺穿刺与经直肠前列腺穿刺活检在前列腺癌诊断的初探

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1009-976X.2020.04.018

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 目的对比经会阴与经直肠前列腺穿刺活检在前列腺癌诊断中的阳性率及并发症。方法回顾分析2017年1月到2019年12月行前列腺穿刺活检的病例,经直肠组187例,经会阴组68例。结果经直肠组阳性穿刺率为34.7%,经会阴组阳性穿刺率为29.4%,两组无统计学差异（P>0.05）。穿刺后经直肠组和经会阴组的血尿发生率分别为40.1%、42.6%,尿潴留发生率分别为6.9%、7.3%,直肠出血发生率分别为1.1%、0%,差别无统计学意义（P>0.05）。穿刺后经直肠组和经会阴组的会阴肿胀的发生率分别为2.6%、13.2%,两组有统计学差异（P<0.05）。结论超声引导下经直肠、经会阴前列腺穿刺活检均为前列腺癌诊断的有效方法。两者穿刺阳性率无明显差异,但并发症各有特点。

关键词: 前列腺癌, 并发症, 经直肠前列腺穿刺活检, 阳性率, 经会阴前列腺穿刺活检

Abstract: Objective To compare the positive rate and complications of transperineal and transrectal prostate biopsy in the diagnosis of prostate cancer. Methods from January 2017 to December 2019, 187 patients underwent transrectal prostate biopsy and 68 underwent transperineal prostate biopsy. Results the positive puncture rate was 34.7% in the transrectal group and 29.4% in the transperineal group, there was no statistical difference between the two groups （P>0.05）. After biopsy, the incidence of hematuria was 40.1% in the transrectal group and 42.6% in transperineal group, the incidence of urinary retention was 6.9% and 7.3%, the incidence of rectal bleeding was 1.1% and 0%, respectively, with no statistically significant difference （P>0.05）. After puncture, the incidence of infection was 9.1% an 1.5% the incidence of perineal swelling was 2.6% and 13.2%, respectively. There was a statistical difference between the two groups （P<0.05）. Conclusion Ultrasound-guided transrectal and perineal prostate biopsy is an effective method for the diagnosis of prostate cancer. There was no significant difference with the positive rates between groups, but each group had its own specific complication.

Key words: transperineal prostate biopsy, transrectal prostate biopsy, positive rate, prostate cancer, complication

中图分类号:

R737.25

袁小旭, 邱剑光, 朱雨沫, 林雪花, 庞国福, 邓建, 谢群. 经会阴前列腺穿刺与经直肠前列腺穿刺活检在前列腺癌诊断的初探[J]. 岭南现代临床外科, 2020, 20(04): 484-487.

YUAN Xiao-xu, QIU Jian-guang, ZHU Yu-mo, LIN Xuehua, PANG Guo-fu, DENG Jian, XIE Qun. Transperineal prostate biopsy and transrectal prostate biopsy in the diagnosis of prostate cancer[J]. Lingnan Modern Clinics in Surgery, 2020, 20(04): 484-487.

参考文献

[1] Mottet N, Bellmunt J, Bolla M, et al.EAU-ESTRO-SIOG guidelines on prostate cancer. Part 1: screening, diagnosis, and local treatment with curative intent[J]. Eur Urol, 2017, 71(4): 618-629.
[2] Sazuka T, Imamoto T, Namekawa T, et al.Analysis of preoperative detection for apex prostate cancer by transrectal biopsy[J]. Prostate Cancer, 2013; 2013: 705865.
[3] Miller J, Perumalla C, Heap G.Complications of transrectal versus transperineal prostate biopsy[J]. ANZ J Surg, 2005, 75(1-2): 48-50.
[4] Grummet JP, Weerakoon M, Huang S, et al.Sepsis and ‘superbugs': should we favour the transperineal over the transrectal approach for prostate biopsy?[J]. BJU Int, 2014, 114(3): 384-388.
[5] Pepe P, Garufi A, Priolo G, Pennisi M.Transperineal versus transrectal MRI/TRUS fusion targeted biopsy: detection rate of clinically significant prostate cancer[J]. Clin Genitourin Cancer, 2017, 15: 429-439.
[6] Abdollah F, Novara G, Briganti A, et al.Trans-rectal versus trans-perineal saturation rebiopsy of the prostate: is there a difference in cancer detection rate?[J]. Urology, 2011, 77(4): 921-925.
[7] Guo LH, Wu R, Xu HX, et al.Comparison between ultrasound guided transperineal and transrectal prostate biopsy: A prospective, randomized, and controlled trial[J]. Sci Rep, 2015, 5: 16089.
[8] Hara R, Jo Y, Fuji 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.
[9] 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.
[10] Rosario DJ, Lane JA, Metcalfe C, et al.Short term outcomes of prostate biopsy in men tested for cancer by prostate specific antigen: prospective evaluation within protect study[J]. BMJ, 2012, 344(9):d7894.
[11] Loeb S, Vellekoop A, Ahmed HU, et al.Systematic review of complications of prostate biopsy[J]. Eur Urol, 2013, 64(6):876-892.
[12] Cerruto MA, 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.
[13] 谢少伟,董柏君,夏建国,等. 前列腺前角穿刺活检在前列腺癌诊断中的价值[J]. 上海交通大学学报(医学版),2019,39(5):518-521.
[14] Kasivisvanathan V, Rannikko AS, Borghi M, et al.MRI-Targeted or Standard Biopsy for Prostate-Cancer Diagnosis[J]. N Engl J Med, 2018, 378(19):1767-1777.
[15] choots IG, Roobol MJ, Nieboer D, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy may enhance the diagnostic accuracy of significant prostate cancer detection compared to standard transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy: a systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. Eur Urol, 2015, 68(3):438-450.
[16] Baco E, Rud E, Eri LM, et al.A randomized controlled trial to assess andcompare the outcomes of two-core prostate biopsy guided by fusedmagnetic resonance and transrectal ultrasound images and traditional 12-core systematic biopsy[J]. Eur Urol, 2016, 69(1):149-156.
[17] Siddiqui MM, Rais-Bahrami S, Turkbey B, et al.Comparison of MR/ultrasound fusion-guided biopsy with ultrasound-guided biopsy for the diagnosis of prostate cancer[J]. JAMA, 2015, 313(4):390-397.