Daniël F Osses1, Joost J van Asten2, Gerard J Kieft3, Jasper D Tijsterman2. 1. Department of Urology, Haga Teaching Hospital, Leyburg 275, 2545 CH, The Hague, The Netherlands. d.f.osses@hagaziekenhuis.nl. 2. Department of Urology, Haga Teaching Hospital, Leyburg 275, 2545 CH, The Hague, The Netherlands. 3. Department of Radiology, Haga Teaching Hospital, The Hague, The Netherlands.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Recent studies have shown that multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and magnetic resonance imaging-guided prostate biopsy in patients with suspected prostate cancer increase detection rate and clinical significance of diagnosed tumors. Purpose of this study is to evaluate the detection rates of prostate cancer for magnetic resonance imaging-guided prostate biopsy related to Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System score. METHODS: We included all patients with cancer-suspicious lesions on 3-Tesla multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging-prostate who underwent magnetic resonance imaging-guided prostate biopsy in Haga Teaching Hospital between January 2013 and January 2015. RESULTS: In total, 155 patients were included. In 100 of 155 (65 %) men, MRI-guided prostate biopsy was positive for prostate cancer. No biopsy of PI-RADS 2-lesions was positive. PI-RADS 3- and 4-lesions were, respectively, in 10 and 77 % prostate cancer positive. Biopsies of PI-RADS 5-lesions were in 89 % of the cases positive. The majority of detected cancers (63 %) were Gleason score ≥ 7, and this number increases to 75 % in positive PI-RADS 5-lesions. CONCLUSIONS: Magnetic resonance imaging-guided prostate biopsy has a high detection rate of prostate cancer in men with cancer-suspicious lesions on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging-prostate, and this rate (65 %) increases with the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System score (81 % in PI-RADS 4- and 5-lesions).
PURPOSE: Recent studies have shown that multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and magnetic resonance imaging-guided prostate biopsy in patients with suspected prostate cancer increase detection rate and clinical significance of diagnosed tumors. Purpose of this study is to evaluate the detection rates of prostate cancer for magnetic resonance imaging-guided prostate biopsy related to Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System score. METHODS: We included all patients with cancer-suspicious lesions on 3-Tesla multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging-prostate who underwent magnetic resonance imaging-guided prostate biopsy in Haga Teaching Hospital between January 2013 and January 2015. RESULTS: In total, 155 patients were included. In 100 of 155 (65 %) men, MRI-guided prostate biopsy was positive for prostate cancer. No biopsy of PI-RADS 2-lesions was positive. PI-RADS 3- and 4-lesions were, respectively, in 10 and 77 % prostate cancer positive. Biopsies of PI-RADS 5-lesions were in 89 % of the cases positive. The majority of detected cancers (63 %) were Gleason score ≥ 7, and this number increases to 75 % in positive PI-RADS 5-lesions. CONCLUSIONS: Magnetic resonance imaging-guided prostate biopsy has a high detection rate of prostate cancer in men with cancer-suspicious lesions on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging-prostate, and this rate (65 %) increases with the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System score (81 % in PI-RADS 4- and 5-lesions).
Authors: Caroline M A Hoeks; Jelle O Barentsz; Thomas Hambrock; Derya Yakar; Diederik M Somford; Stijn W T P J Heijmink; Tom W J Scheenen; Pieter C Vos; Henkjan Huisman; Inge M van Oort; J Alfred Witjes; Arend Heerschap; Jurgen J Fütterer Journal: Radiology Date: 2011-10 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Caroline M A Hoeks; Martijn G Schouten; Joyce G R Bomers; Stefan P Hoogendoorn; Christina A Hulsbergen-van de Kaa; Thomas Hambrock; Henk Vergunst; J P Michiel Sedelaar; Jurgen J Fütterer; Jelle O Barentsz Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2012-02-01 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Thomas Hambrock; Diederik M Somford; Caroline Hoeks; Stefan A W Bouwense; Henkjan Huisman; Derya Yakar; Inge M van Oort; J Alfred Witjes; Jurgen J Fütterer; Jelle O Barentsz Journal: J Urol Date: 2009-12-14 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Timur H Kuru; Matthias C Roethke; Philip Rieker; Wilfried Roth; Michael Fenchel; Markus Hohenfellner; Heinz-Peter Schlemmer; Boris A Hadaschik Journal: BJU Int Date: 2013-08-13 Impact factor: 5.588
Authors: Sarah R Willis; Hashim U Ahmed; Caroline M Moore; Ian Donaldson; Mark Emberton; Alec H Miners; Jan van der Meulen Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2014-06-15 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Anssi Auvinen; Antti Rannikko; Kimmo Taari; Paula Kujala; Tuomas Mirtti; Anu Kenttämies; Irina Rinta-Kiikka; Terho Lehtimäki; Niku Oksala; Kim Pettersson; Teuvo L Tammela Journal: Eur J Epidemiol Date: 2017-07-31 Impact factor: 8.082
Authors: Akshay Wadera; Mostafa Alabousi; Alex Pozdnyakov; Mohammed Kashif Al-Ghita; Ali Jafri; Matthew Df McInnes; Nicola Schieda; Christian B van der Pol; Jean-Paul Salameh; Lucy Samoilov; Kaela Gusenbauer; Abdullah Alabousi Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2020-10-22 Impact factor: 3.039