超声引导下经会阴前列腺穿刺活检与经直肠穿刺活检安全性研究

doi:10.19558/j.cnki.10-1020/r.2018.02.010

摘要
图/表
参考文献
相关文章 (15)

全文: PDF (675 KB) RICH HTML
输出: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

摘要 目的:比较超声引导下经会阴前列腺穿刺活检术和经直肠前列腺穿刺活检术的并发症发生率,探讨发生原因及防治方法,为临床工作中选择合适的穿刺方法提供参考。方法:统计2010~2016年间在中国人民解放军307医院和中国人民解放军空军总医院共609例前列腺穿刺活检患者的临床资料,分为经会阴穿刺组和经直肠穿刺组,对穿刺相关并发症进行统计分析。结果:两组间总的并发症、严重并发症、血便、发热、菌血症的发生率经直肠穿刺组均显著高于经会阴穿刺组;血尿及疼痛的发生率差别无统计学意义。结论:经直肠前列腺穿刺活检相较经会阴途径更方便快捷,但经会阴途径比经直肠穿刺活检更加安全。

	服务

	把本文推荐给朋友
	加入我的书架
	加入引用管理器
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	作者相关文章
	彭毓璐
	麦海星
	董金凯
	黄晨
	李学超
	亓立成
	周毅恒
	穆大为
	陈立军

关键词 ：前列腺癌, 前列腺穿刺, 经会阴, 经直肠, 并发症

Abstract：Objective:To compare the complication rate of transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) guided prostate biopsies with transperineal approach and transrectal approach, to find out the causes and explore the prevention and treatment methods, provide evidence for clinicians to select the appropriate biopsy approach under different conditions. Methods:Statistical analysis was performed on a total of 609 patients who underwent prostate biopsy in 307th Hospital of PLA and Air Force General Hospital of PLA from 2010 to 2016. All patients were divided into transperineal group and transrectal group, and the incidence of complications was analyzed. Results:There was no significant difference in the incidence of hematuria and pain between the two groups. The incidence of total complications, serious complications, hematochezia, fever and sepsis in the transrectal group was significantly higher than that in the transperineal group. Conclusions:The transrectal approach is more convenient and time saving than the perineal approach, and the perineal approach is safer than the transrectal approach.

Key words： prostate carcinoma biopsy transrectal approach transperineal approach complication

收稿日期: 2017-09-04

ZTFLH:

R737

基金资助:卫生部首都发展科研专项(首发2016-4-5061)

通讯作者: 陈立军,chenlj829@163.com

引用本文:

彭毓璐, 麦海星, 董金凯, 黄晨, 李学超, 亓立成, 周毅恒, 穆大为, 陈立军. 超声引导下经会阴前列腺穿刺活检与经直肠穿刺活检安全性研究[J]. 微创泌尿外科杂志, 2018, 7(s1): 31-.
Peng Yulu, Mai Haixing, Dong Jinkai, Huang Chen, Li Xuechao, Qi Licheng, Zhou Yiheng, Mu Dawei, Chen Lijun. Safety of ultrasound guided transperineal prostate biopsy vs. transrectal biopsy. JOURNAL OF MINIMALLY INVASIVE UROLOGY, 2018, 7(s1): 31-.

链接本文:

http://journal20.magtechjournal.com/Jwk_zgmnwk/CN/abstract/abstract1405.shtml 或 http://journal20.magtechjournal.com/Jwk_zgmnwk/CN/Y2018/V7/Is1/31

[1] Malvezzi M, Bertuccio P, Rosso T, et al.European cancer mortality predictions for the year 2015: does lung cancer have the highest death rate in EU women? Ann Oncol, 2015,26(4):779-786.
[2] Chen W, Zheng R, Baade PD, et al.Cancer statistics in China, 2015. CA Cancer J Clin, 2016,66(2):115-132.
[3] 那彦群,叶章群,孙光,等.中国泌尿外科疾病诊断治疗指南.北京:人民卫生出版社,2014:63.
[4] Heidenreich A, Aus G, Bolla M, et al.EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. Eur Urol, 2008,53(1):68-80.
[5] Guo LH, Wu R, Xu HX, et al.Comparison between Ultrasound Guided Transperineal and Transrectal Prostate Biopsy: A Prospective, Randomized, and Controlled Trial. Sci Rep, 2015,5:16089.
[6] Yan WG, Li HZ, Zhou Y, et al.Prostate carcinoma spatial distribution patterns in Chinese men investigated with systematic transperineal ultrasound guided 11-region biopsy. Urol Oncol, 2009,27(5):520-524.
[7] Moran BJ, Braccloforte MH.Stereotactic transperineal prostate biopsy. Urology, 2009,73(2):386-388.
[8] Mabjeesh NJ, Lidawi G, Chen JZ, et al.High detection rate of significant prostate tumours in anterior zones using transperineal ultrasound-guided template saturation biopsy. BJU Int, 2012,110(7):993-997.
[9] Lawrentschuk N, Haider M, Daljeet N, et al.Prostatic evasive anterior tumours': the role of magnetic resonance imaging. BJU Int, 2010,105(9):1231-1236.
[10] Loeb S, Vellekoop A, Ahmed HU, et al.Systematic review of complications of prostate biopsy. Eur Urol, 2013,64(6):876-892.
[11] Steensels D, Slabbaert K, De Wever L, et al.Fluoroquinolone-resistant E. coli in intestinal flora of patients undergoing transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy-should we reassess our practices for antibiotic prophylaxis. Clin Microbiol Infect, 2012,18(6):575-581.
[12] Nam RK, Saskin R, Lee Y, et al.Increasing hospital admission rates for urological complications after transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy. J Urol, 2010,183(3):963-968.
[13] Pepe P, Aragona F.Prostate biopsy: results and advantages of the transperineal approach twenty-year experience of a single center. World J Urol, 2014,32(2):373-377.
[14] Gaylis F, Nasseri R, Fink L, et al.Prostate Biopsy Complications: A Dual Analysis. Urology, 2016,93:135-140.
[15] Zani EL, Clark OA, Rodrigues Netto Jr N. Antibiotic prophylaxis for transrectal prostate biopsy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 2011:CD006576.
[16] 李虎宜,杨碧云,黄小军,等.经直肠超声引导下前列腺穿刺活检降低诊断感染并发症的临床研究.现代泌尿生殖肿瘤杂志,2015,7(2):85-87.
[17] Rosario DJ, Lane JA, Metcalfe C, et al.Short term outcomes of prostate biopsy in men tested for cancer by prostate specific antigen: pro- spective evaluation within Protec T study. BMJ, 2012,344:d7894.
[18] Kilciler M, Erdemir F, Demir E, et al.The effect of rectal Foley catheterization on rectal bleeding rates after transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy. J Vasc Interv Radiol, 2008,19(9):1344-1346.
[19] Saredi G, Sighinolfi MC, Fidanza F, et al.Does needle calibre affect pain and complication rates in patients undergoing transperineal prostate biopsy? A prospective, randomized trial. Asian J Androl, 2009,11(6):678-682.
[20] Raaijmakers R, Kirkels WJ, Roobol MJ, et al.Complication rates and risk factors of 5802 transrectal ultrasound-guided sextant biopsies of the prostate within a population-based screening program. Urology, 2002,60(5):826-830.
[21] 严维刚,周毅,周智恩,等.模板引导下经会阴前列腺穿刺活检10年经验总结.中华泌尿外科杂志,2015,36(1):39-43.