Effect of preoperative PI-RADS assessment on pathological outcomes in patients who underwent radical prostatectomy

被引:1
|
作者
Peng, Qianyu [1 ]
Xu, Lili [1 ]
Zhang, Gumuyang [1 ]
Zhang, Daming [1 ]
Zhang, Jiahui [1 ]
Zhang, Xiaoxiao [1 ]
Bai, Xin [1 ]
Chen, Li [1 ]
Jin, Zhengyu [1 ,2 ]
Sun, Hao [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Chinese Acad Med Sci, Peking Union Med Coll, Peking Union Med Coll Hosp, Dept Radiol,State Key Lab Complex Severe & Rare Di, Shuaifuyuan 1,Wangfujing St, Beijing 100730, Peoples R China
[2] Natl Ctr Qual Control Radiol, Shuaifuyuan 1,Wangfujing St, Beijing 100730, Peoples R China
关键词
Magnetic resonance imaging; Prostate imaging-reporting and data system; Radical prostatectomy; Positive surgical margins; Pathological outcomes; CANCER; RISK; MEN;
D O I
10.1186/s40644-023-00619-x
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Objective To assess the effect of preoperative MRI with standardized Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) assessment on pathological outcomes in prostate cancer (PCa) patients who underwent radical prostatectomy (RP). Patients and methods This retrospective cohort study included patients who had undergone prostate MRI and subsequent RP for PCa between January 2017 and December 2022. The patients were divided into the PI-RADS group and the non-PI-RADS group according to evaluation scheme of presurgery MRI. The preoperative characteristics and postoperative outcomes were retrieved and analyzed. The pathological outcomes included pathological T stage (pT2 vs. pT3-4) and positive surgical margins (PSMs). Patients were further stratified according to statistically significant preoperative variables to assess the difference in pathological outcomes. A propensity score matching based on the above preoperative characteristics was additionally performed. Results A total of 380 patients were included in this study, with 201 patients in the PI-RADS group and 179 in the non-PI-RADS group. The two groups had similar preoperative characteristics, except for clinical T stage (cT). As for pathological outcomes, the PI-RADS group showed a significantly lower percentage of pT3-4 (21.4% vs. 48.0%, p < 0.001), a lower percentage of PSMs (31.3% vs. 40.9%, p = 0.055), and a higher concordance between the cT and pT (79.1% vs. 64.8%, p = 0.003). The PI-RADS group also showed a lower proportion of pT3-4 (p < 0.001) in the cT1-2 subgroup and the cohort after propensity score matching. The PSM rate of cT3 patients was reduced by 39.2% in the PI-RADS group but without statistical significance (p = 0.089). Conclusions Preoperative MRI with standardized PI-RADS assessment could benefit the decision-making of patients by reducing the rate of pathologically confirmed non-organ-confined PCa after RP and slightly reducing the PSM rate compared with non-PI-RADS assessment.
引用
收藏
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Effect of preoperative PI-RADS assessment on pathological outcomes in patients who underwent radical prostatectomy
    Qianyu Peng
    Lili Xu
    Gumuyang Zhang
    Daming Zhang
    Jiahui Zhang
    Xiaoxiao Zhang
    Xin Bai
    Li Chen
    Zhengyu Jin
    Hao Sun
    Cancer Imaging, 23
  • [2] Prognostic significance of PI-RADS 5 lesions in patients treated by radical prostatectomy
    G. Fiard
    A. Seigneurin
    M. Roumiguié
    S. Albisinni
    J. Anract
    G. Assenmacher
    N. Barry Delongchamps
    C. Dariane
    A. Feyaerts
    A. Fourcade
    G. Fournier
    P. Gontero
    R. Mastroianni
    M. Oderda
    A. Peltier
    T. Roumeguère
    T. Saussez
    G. Simone
    J. Van Damme
    J. L. Descotes
    G. Ploussard
    R. Diamand
    World Journal of Urology, 2023, 41 : 1285 - 1291
  • [3] Prognostic significance of PI-RADS 5 lesions in patients treated by radical prostatectomy
    Fiard, G.
    Seigneurin, A.
    Roumiguie, M.
    Albisinni, S.
    Anract, J.
    Assenmacher, G.
    Delongchamps, N. Barry
    Dariane, C.
    Feyaerts, A.
    Fourcade, A.
    Fournier, G.
    Gontero, P.
    Mastroianni, R.
    Oderda, M.
    Peltier, A.
    Roumeguere, T.
    Saussez, T.
    Simone, G.
    Van Damme, J.
    Descotes, J. L.
    Ploussard, G.
    Diamand, R.
    WORLD JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2023, 41 (05) : 1285 - 1291
  • [4] PI-RADS 2.0 for Recurrence Prognosis after radical Prostatectomy
    Heberer, Bettina
    AKTUELLE UROLOGIE, 2017, 48 (05) : 414 - 414
  • [5] Preoperative PI-RADS v2.1 Scoring System Improves Risk Classification in Patients Undergoing Radical Prostatectomy
    Fukui, Yudai
    Yamada, Yasutaka
    Sakamoto, Shinichi
    Horikoshi, Takuro
    Zhao, Xue
    Sato, Kodai
    Nanba, Sakie
    Kubota, Yoshihiro
    Kanesaka, Manato
    Fujimoto, Ayumi
    Shibata, Hiroki
    Goto, Yusuke
    Sazuka, Tomokazu
    Imamura, Yusuke
    Uno, Takashi
    Ichikawa, Tomohiko
    ANTICANCER RESEARCH, 2023, 43 (12) : 5705 - 5712
  • [6] PI-RADS v2 Findings of MRI and Positive Biopsy Core Percentage would Predict Pathological Extraprostatic Extension in Patients who Underwent Robot Assisted Radical Prostatectomy: A Retrospective Study
    Yamashita, Shimpei
    Kohjimoto, Yasuo
    Sato, Hirotatsu
    Kikkawa, Kazuro
    Sonomura, Tetsuo
    Hara, Isao
    UROLOGY JOURNAL, 2022, 19 (06) : 438 - 444
  • [7] Preoperative and Postoperative Gleason Score Correlation of Patients Who Underwent Radical Prostatectomy
    Guner, Ekrem
    Simsek, Abdulmuttalip
    UROONKOLOJI BULTENI-BULLETIN OF UROONCOLOGY, 2020, 19 (01): : 35 - 37
  • [8] Comparison of PI-RADS mpMRI to radical prostatectomy pathology a double blinded study!
    Sharma, S.
    King, Q.
    Chemasle, C.
    Lo, S. S.
    BJU INTERNATIONAL, 2016, 117 : 52 - 53
  • [9] Immunosuppression Does Not Affect Adverse Pathological Outcomes in Men Who Underwent Radical Prostatectomy.
    Eltemamy, M.
    Elshafei, A.
    Nyame, Y.
    Crane, A.
    Wee, A.
    Krishnamurthi, V.
    Klein, E.
    Jones, S.
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF TRANSPLANTATION, 2018, 18 : 804 - 805
  • [10] Clinical Significance of the PI-RADS Score in Men with Prostate Cancer Undergoing Radical Prostatectomy
    Nwanze, Julum
    Teramoto, Yuki
    Wang, Ying
    Miyamoto, Hiroshi
    LABORATORY INVESTIGATION, 2023, 103 (03) : S781 - S782