| Literature DB >> 33809967 |
Daiki Kato1, Kaori Ozawa2, Shinichi Takeuchi2, Makoto Kawase1, Kota Kawase1, Chie Nakai1, Manabu Takai1, Koji Iinuma1, Keita Nakane1, Hiroki Kato3, Masayuki Matsuo3, Natsuko Suzui3, Tatsuhiko Miyazaki3, Takuya Koie1.
Abstract
This study aimed to determine the predictive value of the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2 (PI-RADS v2) based on biparametric magnetic resonance imaging (bpMRI) with combined target biopsy (TBx) and systematic biopsy (SBx) in patients with suspicion of having clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa). In this retrospective study, we reviewed the clinical and pathological records of 184 consecutive patients who underwent bpMRI before prostate biopsy. We focused on patients with PI-RADS v2 scores ≥ 3. MRI was performed using a 3-Tesla clinical scanner with a 32-channel phased-array receiver coil. PI-RADS v2 was used to describe bpMRI findings based on T2-weighted imaging and diffusion-weighted imaging scores. The primary endpoint was the diagnostic accuracy rate of PI-RADS v2 based on bpMRI for patients with prostate cancer (PCa) who underwent combined TBx and SBx. A total of 104 patients were enrolled in this study. Combined TBx and SBx was significantly superior to either method alone for PCa detection in patients with suspicious lesions according to PI-RADS v2. TBx and SBx detected concordant csPCa in only 24.1% of the patients. In addition, the rate of increase in the Gleason score was similar between SBx (41.5%) and TBx (34.1%). The diagnostic accuracy of bpMRI is comparable to that of standard multiparametric MRI for the detection of csPCa. Moreover, combined TBx and SBx may be optimal for the accurate determination of csPCa diagnosis, the International Society of Urological Pathology grade, and risk classification.Entities:
Keywords: positive predictive value; prostate biopsy; prostate cancer; prostate imaging reporting and data system
Year: 2021 PMID: 33809967 PMCID: PMC8025823 DOI: 10.3390/curroncol28020123
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Curr Oncol ISSN: 1198-0052 Impact factor: 3.677
Patient characteristics.
| Age (year, median, interquartile range) | 71 (67–75) |
| Body mass index (kg/m2, median, interquartile range) | 23.2 (21.5–25.3) |
| Prostate-specific antigen (ng/mL, median, interquartile range) | 8.32 (5.38–13.86) |
| Prostate volume (mL, median, interquartile range) | 30.7 (23.0–44.8) |
| Prostate-specific antigen density (ng/mL/cm3, median, interquartile range) | 0.26 (0.18–0.44) |
| Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2 (number, %) | |
| 3 | 22 (21.1) |
| 4 | 55 (52.9) |
| 5 | 27 (26.0) |
Figure 1The association between Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2 (PI-RADS v2) and International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) grade according to the prostate cancer detection. PI-RADS v2 scores were found to significantly correlate with ISUP grade (p = 0.004).
ISUP grade and prostate cancer location concordance outcomes according to target or systemic biopsies in patients with clinically significant prostate cancer.
| Number, % | |
|---|---|
| Concordance | 13 (24.1) |
| Inconsistency | 41 (75.9) |
| Concordance ISUP grade between target and systemic biopsy | 10 (24.4) |
| Upgrading ISUP grade on target biopsy | 14 (34.1) |
| Upgrading ISUP grade on systemic biopsy | 17 (41.5) |
Prostate-biopsy-related complications according to the Clavien–Dindo classification.
| Type of Complication (Number, %) | Any Grade | Grade 3 |
|---|---|---|
| Prostatitis | 2 (1.9) | 1 (1.0) |
| Hematuria | 44 (42.3) | 2 (1.9) |
| Urinary retention | 3 (2.9) | 2 (1.9) |
| Hematospermia | 1 (1.0) | - |