COMPARISON OF MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING-TRANSRECTAL ULTRASOUND FUSION PROSTATE BIOPSY WITH STANDARD SYSTEMATIC BIOPSY: A SINGLE CENTER EXPERIENCE

被引:0
|
作者
Koparal, Murat Yavuz [1 ]
Bulut, Ender Cem [2 ]
Cetin, Serhat [3 ]
Cosar, Ugur [3 ]
Budak, Firat Caglar [3 ]
Ucar, Murat [4 ]
Tokgoz, Nil [4 ]
Senturk, Aykut Bugra [5 ]
Sen, Ilker [3 ]
Sozen, Tevfik Sinan [3 ]
机构
[1] Recep Tayyip Erdogan Univ, Dept Urol, Training & Res Hosp, Rize, Turkey
[2] Van Training & Res Hosp, Dept Urol, Van, Turkey
[3] Gazi Univ, Dept Urol, Sch Med, Ankara, Turkey
[4] Gazi Univ, Dept Radiol, Sch Med, Ankara, Turkey
[5] Losante Childrens & Adult Hosp, Urol Clin, Ankara, Turkey
来源
ARCHIVOS ESPANOLES DE UROLOGIA | 2021年 / 74卷 / 08期
关键词
Prostate cancer; Fusion biopsy; Multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging; ACTIVE SURVEILLANCE; PSA-DENSITY; CANCER; ACCURACY;
D O I
10.37554/en-20201231-3403-3
中图分类号
R5 [内科学]; R69 [泌尿科学(泌尿生殖系疾病)];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
OBJECTIVE: To compare systematic biopsy with MRI-TRUS fusion prostate biopsy in terms of cancer detection rates. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The data of the patients who had a Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) score of 3 or more lesions on mpMRI and underwent MRI-TRUS fusion biopsy with simultaneous 12-core standard systematic biopsy from June 2016 to June 2019 in our tertiary center were retrospectively reviewed. Clinical, radiological and pathological data were recorded. Statistical difference among the groups was determined by using McNemar tests. RESULTS: A total of 344 patients were included in the study. As a result of transrectal targeted and systematic combined biopsy, 117 patients were diagnosed with prostate cancer. Benign pathology rates in patients with PI-RADS 3, PI-RADS 4, and PI-RADS 5 lesions were 93.8%, 68.5%, and 46.4%, respectively. Patients were divided into Iwo groups as ISUP grade 1 and ISUP grade >= 2 and cancer detection rates (CDRs) were found significantly higher in transrectal targeted biopsy compared with the systematic biopsy (12.5% vs. %6.4, p=0.007 and 17.4% vs. 8.7%, p<0.001, respectively). Targeted biopsy CDRs were found significantly higher in the high PSA density group (24.5% vs. 41.4%, p=0.001) unlike the systematic biopsy. CONCLUSION: Transrectal targeted biopsy was superior to systematic biopsy in the diagnosis of prostate cancer. Clinicians should be more selective when making a biopsy decision for patients with PI-RADS 3 lesions. PSA density can be used as a criterion for patient selection for targeted biopsy.
引用
收藏
页码:790 / 795
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Magnetic Resonance Imaging/Ultrasound Fusion-guided Transperineal Versus Magnetic Resonance Imaging/Ultrasound Fusion-guided Transrectal Prostate Biopsy-A Systematic Review
    Rai, Bhavan Prasad
    Mayerhofer, Christoph
    Somani, Bhaskar Kumar
    Kallidonis, Panagiotis
    Nagele, Udo
    Tokas, Theodoros
    EUROPEAN UROLOGY ONCOLOGY, 2021, 4 (06): : 904 - 913
  • [32] Prostate Cancer Diagnosis on Repeat Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Transrectal Ultrasound Fusion Biopsy of Benign Lesions: Recommendations for Repeat Sampling EDITORIAL COMMENT
    Salami, Simpa S.
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2016, 196 (01): : 67 - 67
  • [33] Does magnetic resonance imaging-guided biopsy improve prostate cancer detection? A comparison of systematic, cognitive fusion and ultrasound fusion prostate biopsy
    Kam, Jonathan
    Yuminaga, Yuigi
    Kim, Raymond
    Aluwihare, Kushlan
    Macneil, Finlay
    Ouyang, Rupert
    Ruthven, Stephen
    Louie-Johnsun, Mark
    PROSTATE INTERNATIONAL, 2018, 6 (03) : 88 - 93
  • [34] Risk of Upgrading from Prostate Biopsy to Radical Prostatectomy Pathology-Does Saturation Biopsy of Index Lesion during Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Transrectal Ultrasound Fusion Biopsy Help?
    Calio, Brian P.
    Sidana, Abhinav
    Sugano, Dordaneh
    Gaur, Sonia
    Maruf, Mahir
    Jain, Amit L.
    Merino, Maria J.
    Choyke, Peter L.
    Wood, Bradford J.
    Pinto, Peter A.
    Turkbey, Baris
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2018, 199 (04): : 976 - 981
  • [35] Comparison of prostate cancer biopsy guided by magnetic resonance imaging, transrectal ultrasound and their combination scheme in biopsy Naive patients
    Wu, W.
    Huang, H.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2017, 24 : 102 - 102
  • [36] Transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy versus combined magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion and systematic biopsy for prostate cancer detection in routine clinical practice
    Bae, Jae Heung
    Kim, See Hyung
    ULTRASONOGRAPHY, 2020, 39 (02) : 137 - 143
  • [37] Is A Systematic Transrectal Ultrasound-Guided Biopsy Required When a Targeted Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Ultrasound Fusion Biopsy is Performed?
    Bagshaw, H. P.
    Sonn, G. A.
    Fan, R. E.
    Ghanouni, P.
    Loening, A. M.
    Heidari, N.
    Von Eyben, R.
    Thong, A. E.
    Buyyounouski, M. K.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2019, 105 (01): : E262 - E262
  • [38] 912 Comparison of Magnetic Resonance Imaging Cognitive Prostate Biopsy Versus Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Ultrasound Fusion Prostate Biopsy in The Detection of Prostate Cancer
    Bhojwani, A.
    Desai, C.
    Ehsanullah, S. A.
    Shahzad, S. A.
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2021, 108 (SUPPL 2)
  • [39] The Role of Ipsilateral and Contralateral Transrectal Ultrasound-guided Systematic Prostate Biopsy in Men With Unilateral Magnetic Resonance Imaging Lesion Undergoing Magnetic Resonance Imaging-ultrasound Fusion-targeted Prostate Biopsy
    Bryk, Darren J.
    Llukani, Elton
    Taneja, Samir S.
    Rosenkrantz, Andrew B.
    Huang, William C.
    Lepor, Herbert
    UROLOGY, 2017, 102 : 178 - 182
  • [40] External validation of a prostate cancer nomogram on magnetic resonance/transrectal ultrasound fusion biopsy in men with prior negative systematic biopsy
    Koparal, Murat Yavuz
    Cetin, Serhat
    Bulut, Ender Cem
    Budak, Firat Caglar
    Coskun, Cagri
    Huseynli, Arif
    Ucar, Murat
    Sen, Ilker
    Sozen, Tevfik Sinan
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PRACTICE, 2021,