Literature DB >> 28921850

Prospective comparison of transperineal magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasonography fusion biopsy and transrectal systematic biopsy in biopsy-naïve patients.

Angelika Borkowetz1, Boris Hadaschik2,3, Ivan Platzek4, Marieta Toma5, Georgi Torsev2, Theresa Renner1, Roman Herout1, Martin Baunacke1, Michael Laniado4, Gustavo Baretton5, Jan Philipp Radtke2, Claudia Kesch2, Markus Hohenfellner2, Michael Froehner1, Heinz-Peter Schlemmer6, Manfred Wirth1, Stefan Zastrow1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the value of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) in the detection of significant prostate cancer (PCa) and to compare transperineal MRI/ultrasonography fusion biopsy (fusPbx) with conventional transrectal systematic biopsy (sysPbx) in biopsy-naïve patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This multicentre, prospective trial investigated biopsy-naïve patients with suspicion of PCa undergoing transperineal fusPbx in combination with transrectal sysPbx (comPbx). The primary outcome was the detection of significant PCa, defined as Gleason pattern 4 or 5. We analysed the results after a study period of 2 years.
RESULTS: The study included 214 patients. The median (range) number of targeted and systematic cores was 6 (2-15) and 12 (6-18), respectively. The overall PCa detection rate of comPbx was 52%. FusPbx detected more PCa than sysPbx (47% vs 43%; P = 0.15). The detection rate of significant PCa was 38% for fusPbx and 35% for sysPbx (P = 0.296). The rate of missed significant PCa was 14% in fusPbx and 21% in sysPbx. ComPbx detected significantly more significant PCa than fusPbx and sysPbx alone (44% vs 38% vs 35%; P < 0.005). In patients presenting with Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) 4 and 5 lesions there was a higher detection rate of significant PCa than in patients presenting with PI-RADS ≤3 lesions in comPbx (61% vs 14%; P < 0.005).
CONCLUSIONS: For biopsy-naïve men with tumour-suspicious lesions in mpMRI, the combined approach outperformed both fusPbx and sysPbx in the detection of overall PCa and significant PCa. Thus, biopsy-naïve patients may benefit from sysPbx in combination with mpMRI targeted fusPbx.
© 2017 The Authors BJU International © 2017 BJU International Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  MRI/ultrasonographyfusion biopsy; first biopsy; multiparametric MRI; prostate cancer; systematic biopsy

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28921850     DOI: 10.1111/bju.14017

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BJU Int        ISSN: 1464-4096            Impact factor:   5.588


  17 in total

1.  Imaging: MRI improves cost and accuracy of prostate cancer biopsy.

Authors:  James Thompson; Phillip Stricker
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2017-11-08       Impact factor: 14.432

2.  [Paradigm shift in urology : Prostate cancer diagnosis using MRI-targeted or standard transrectal ultrasonography-guided biopsy].

Authors:  B Hadaschik
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2018-06       Impact factor: 0.639

3.  Multicenter analysis of clinical and MRI characteristics associated with detecting clinically significant prostate cancer in PI-RADS (v2.0) category 3 lesions.

Authors:  Bashir Al Hussein Al Awamlh; Leonard S Marks; Geoffrey A Sonn; Shyam Natarajan; Richard E Fan; Michael D Gross; Elizabeth Mauer; Samprit Banerjee; Stefanie Hectors; Sigrid Carlsson; Daniel J Margolis; Jim C Hu
Journal:  Urol Oncol       Date:  2020-04-17       Impact factor: 3.498

4.  Evidence-based guideline recommendations on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer: A Cancer Care Ontario updated clinical practice guideline.

Authors:  Masoom A Haider; Judy Brown; Jospeh L K Chin; Nauthan Perlis; Nicola Schieda; Andrew Loblaw
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2022-02       Impact factor: 1.862

5.  Prostate cancer: diagnostic yield of modified transrectal ultrasound-guided twelve-core combined biopsy (targeted plus systematic biopsies) using prebiopsy magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  Chorog Song; Sung Yoon Park
Journal:  Abdom Radiol (NY)       Date:  2021-06-28

6.  Cancer core length from targeted biopsy: an index of prostate cancer volume and pathological stage.

Authors:  Demetrios N Simopoulos; Anthony E Sisk; Alan Priester; Ely R Felker; Lorna Kwan; Merdie K Delfin; Robert E Reiter; Leonard S Marks
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2019-02-24       Impact factor: 5.969

7.  Comparison of Targeted vs Systematic Prostate Biopsy in Men Who Are Biopsy Naive: The Prospective Assessment of Image Registration in the Diagnosis of Prostate Cancer (PAIREDCAP) Study.

Authors:  Fuad F Elkhoury; Ely R Felker; Lorna Kwan; Anthony E Sisk; Merdie Delfin; Shyam Natarajan; Leonard S Marks
Journal:  JAMA Surg       Date:  2019-09-01       Impact factor: 16.681

8.  Prostate cancer detection rate in men undergoing transperineal template-guided saturation and targeted prostate biopsy.

Authors:  Basil Kaufmann; Karim Saba; Tobias S Schmidli; Stephanie Stutz; Leon Bissig; Anna Jelena Britschgi; Evodia Schaeren; Alexander Gu; Nicole Langenegger; Tullio Sulser; Daniel Eberli; Etienne X Keller; Thomas Hermanns; Cédric Poyet
Journal:  Prostate       Date:  2021-12-16       Impact factor: 4.012

Review 9.  MRI in early prostate cancer detection: how to manage indeterminate or equivocal PI-RADS 3 lesions?

Authors:  Ivo G Schoots
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2018-02

10.  Photoacoustic tomography of intact human prostates and vascular texture analysis identify prostate cancer biopsy targets.

Authors:  Brittani L Bungart; Lu Lan; Pu Wang; Rui Li; Michael O Koch; Liang Cheng; Timothy A Masterson; Murat Dundar; Ji-Xin Cheng
Journal:  Photoacoustics       Date:  2018-08-03
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.