OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the feasibility of prostate histoscanning true targeting (PHS-TT) guided transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) biopsy. METHODS: This is a prospective, single center, pilot study performed during February 2013-September 2013. All consecutive patients planned for prostate biopsy were included in the study, and all the procedure was performed by a single surgeon aided by the specialized true targeting software. Initially, the patients underwent PHS to map the abnormal areas within the prostate that were ≥0.2 cm(3). TRUS guided biopsies were performed targeting the abnormal areas with a specialized software. Additionally, routine bisextant biopsies were also taken. The final histopathology of the target cores was compared with the bisextant cores. RESULTS: A total of 43 patients underwent combined 'targeted PHS guided' and 'standard 12 core systematic' biopsies. The mean volume of abnormal area detected by PHS is 4.3 cm(3). The overall cancer detection rate was 46.5 % (20/43) with systemic cores and target cores detecting cancer in 44 % (19/43) and 26 % (11/43), respectively. The mean % cancer/core length of the PHS-TT cores were significantly higher than the systematic cores (55.4 vs. 37.5 %. p < 0.05). In biopsy naïve patients, the cancer detection rate (43.7 % vs. 14.8 %. p = 0.06) and the cancer positivity of the cores (30.1 vs. 6.8 %. p < 0.01) of target cores were higher than those patients with prior biopsies. CONCLUSION: PHS-TT is feasible and can be an effective tool for real-time guidance of prostate biopsies.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the feasibility of prostate histoscanning true targeting (PHS-TT) guided transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) biopsy. METHODS: This is a prospective, single center, pilot study performed during February 2013-September 2013. All consecutive patients planned for prostate biopsy were included in the study, and all the procedure was performed by a single surgeon aided by the specialized true targeting software. Initially, the patients underwent PHS to map the abnormal areas within the prostate that were ≥0.2 cm(3). TRUS guided biopsies were performed targeting the abnormal areas with a specialized software. Additionally, routine bisextant biopsies were also taken. The final histopathology of the target cores was compared with the bisextant cores. RESULTS: A total of 43 patients underwent combined 'targeted PHS guided' and 'standard 12 core systematic' biopsies. The mean volume of abnormal area detected by PHS is 4.3 cm(3). The overall cancer detection rate was 46.5 % (20/43) with systemic cores and target cores detecting cancer in 44 % (19/43) and 26 % (11/43), respectively. The mean % cancer/core length of the PHS-TT cores were significantly higher than the systematic cores (55.4 vs. 37.5 %. p < 0.05). In biopsy naïve patients, the cancer detection rate (43.7 % vs. 14.8 %. p = 0.06) and the cancer positivity of the cores (30.1 vs. 6.8 %. p < 0.01) of target cores were higher than those patients with prior biopsies. CONCLUSION: PHS-TT is feasible and can be an effective tool for real-time guidance of prostate biopsies.
Authors: Patrick M Bossuyt; Johannes B Reitsma; David E Bruns; Constantine A Gatsonis; Paul P Glasziou; Les M Irwig; David Moher; Drummond Rennie; Henrica C W de Vet; Jeroen G Lijmer Journal: Croat Med J Date: 2003-10 Impact factor: 1.351
Authors: Andrew B Rosenkrantz; Fang-Ming Deng; Sooah Kim; Ruth P Lim; Nicole Hindman; Thais C Mussi; Bradley Spieler; Jason Oaks; James S Babb; Jonathan Melamed; Samir S Taneja Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2012-10 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Johan Braeckman; Philippe Autier; Christian Garbar; Miriam Pipeleers Marichal; Cristina Soviany; Rina Nir; Dror Nir; Dirk Michielsen; Harry Bleiberg; Lars Egevad; Mark Emberton Journal: BJU Int Date: 2007-10-08 Impact factor: 5.588
Authors: Mesut Remzi; Michael Dobrovits; Andreas Reissigl; Vincent Ravery; Mattias Waldert; Christian Wiunig; Yan Kit Fong; Bob Djavan Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2004-10 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Sofie Isebaert; Laura Van den Bergh; Karin Haustermans; Steven Joniau; Evelyne Lerut; Liesbeth De Wever; Frederik De Keyzer; Tom Budiharto; Pieter Slagmolen; Hendrik Van Poppel; Raymond Oyen Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2012-11-21 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Saqib Javed; Eliot Chadwick; Albert A Edwards; Sabeena Beveridge; Robert Laing; Simon Bott; Christopher Eden; Stephen Langley Journal: BJU Int Date: 2014-03-20 Impact factor: 5.588
Authors: Jonas Schiffmann; Gisa Mehring; Pierre Tennstedt; Lukas Manka; Katharina Boehm; Sami-Ramzi Leyh-Bannurah; Pierre I Karakiewicz; Peter Hammerer; Markus Graefen; Georg Salomon Journal: World J Urol Date: 2015-07-28 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Jonas Schiffmann; Lukas Manka; Katharina Boehm; Sami-Ramzi Leyh-Bannurah; Pierre I Karakiewicz; Markus Graefen; Peter Hammerer; Georg Salomon Journal: World J Urol Date: 2015-04-10 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Jean-Michel Correas; Ethan J Halpern; Richard G Barr; Sangeet Ghai; Jochen Walz; Sylvain Bodard; Charles Dariane; Jean de la Rosette Journal: World J Urol Date: 2020-04-18 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Andrey Morozov; Vasiliy Kozlov; Juan Gomez Rivas; Jeremy Yuen-Chun Teoh; Evgeniy Bezrukov; Alexander Amosov; Eric Barret; Mark Taratkin; Georg Salomon; Thomas R W Herrmann; Ali Gozen; Dmitry Enikeev Journal: World J Urol Date: 2021-04-07 Impact factor: 4.226