Literature DB >> 26767519

Limitations of Elastography Based Prostate Biopsy.

Jonas Schiffmann1, Mircea Grindei2, Zhe Tian3, Dany-Jan Yassin2, Tobias Steinwender2, Sami-Ramzi Leyh-Bannurah4, Marco Randazzo5, Maciej Kwiatkowski6, Pierre I Karakiewicz7, Peter Hammerer2, Lukas Manka2.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The role of elastography in patients initially and at repeat prostate biopsy is still indeterminate. The existing literature is sparse and controversial.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We studied patients who underwent elastography based and systematic biopsy between October 2009 and February 2015 at Braunschweig Prostate Cancer Center. Patients were separated according to first vs repeat biopsy setting. Each prostate sextant was considered an individual case. The sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and accuracy of elastography to predict biopsy results were analyzed. The 95% CIs were determined by bootstrapping analysis of 2,000 samples.
RESULTS: Overall 679 men and a total of 4,074 sextants were identified. Of the 679 men 160 (23.6%) underwent first biopsy and 519 (76.4%) underwent repeat biopsy. In the 160 men at first biopsy sensitivity was 18.0% (95% CI 14.5-21.3), specificity was 87.7% (95% CI 85.3-89.9), positive predictive value was 36.6% (95% CI 28.4-45.4), negative predictive value was 73.0% (95% CI 67.5-77.9) and accuracy was 67.9% (95% CI 63.4-72.2). Results in 519 men (76.4%) at repeat biopsy were 19.8% (95% CI 16.0-23.7), 90.9% (95% CI 89.9-91.9), 20.1% (95% CI 15.8-24.8), 90.7% (95% CI 89.0-92.3) and 83.5% (95% CI 81.6-85.2), respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: We found limited reliability of elastography prediction at prostate biopsy in patients at first and repeat biopsies. Based on our analyses we cannot recommend a variation of well established systematic biopsy patterns or a decrease in biopsy cores based on elastography.
Copyright © 2016 American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  biopsy; diagnostic imaging; elasticity imaging techniques; predictive value of tests; prostatic neoplasms

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26767519     DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2015.12.086

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Urol        ISSN: 0022-5347            Impact factor:   7.450


  4 in total

1.  Prostate cancer rates in patients with initially negative elastography-targeted biopsy vs. systematic biopsy.

Authors:  Jeannette Kratzenberg; Georg Salomon; Pierre Tennstedt; Paolo Dell'Oglio; Derya Tilki; Axel Haferkamp; Markus Graefen; Katharina Boehm
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2018-01-13       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 2.  Imaging for the selection and monitoring of men on active surveillance for prostate cancer.

Authors:  Maria C Velasquez; Nachiketh Soodana Prakash; Vivek Venkatramani; Bruno Nahar; Sanoj Punnen
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2018-04

3.  Contrast-enhanced ultrasound evaluation of the prostate before transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy can improve diagnostic sensitivity: A STARD-compliant article.

Authors:  Guangqing Liu; Size Wu; Li Huang
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2020-05       Impact factor: 1.889

Review 4.  The standards of an ultrasound examination of the prostate gland. Part 2.

Authors:  Janusz F Tyloch; Andrzej Paweł Wieczorek
Journal:  J Ultrason       Date:  2017-03-31
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.