MRI/ultrasound fusion biopsy of the prostate compared to systematic prostate biopsy - Effectiveness and accuracy of a combined approach in daily clinical practice.


Journal

European journal of radiology
ISSN: 1872-7727
Titre abrégé: Eur J Radiol
Pays: Ireland
ID NLM: 8106411

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Sep 2022
Historique:
received: 02 02 2022
revised: 13 06 2022
accepted: 30 06 2022
pubmed: 16 7 2022
medline: 26 8 2022
entrez: 15 7 2022
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

The aim of this study was to compare cancer detection by targeted fusion-guided biopsy with systematic biopsy, and to evaluate the value of combined biopsy, in a daily clinical practice scenario. Furthermore, we aimed to assess the influence of previous biopsies on cancer detection. In this retrospective single-centre study, we evaluated 524 cases of combined biopsy of the prostate from October 2015 to December 2018. All men had a clinical suspicion for prostate cancer due to an elevated PSA and/or a suspicious digital rectal examination and underwent a multiparametric MRI of the prostate read by one out of 6 experienced radiologists. In all cases, fusion-guided biopsy of the prostate was consecutively followed by systematic 12-core biopsy in the same session at the same urological department performed by one out of 5 experienced urologists. In 270/524 (51.5%) cases, cancer was found using combined biopsy. Systematic biopsy alone detected cancer in 205/524 (39.1%) and clinically significant cancer in 137/524 (26.1%) cases. Fusion-guided biopsy alone detected 227/524 (43.3%) and clinically significant cancer in 150/524 (28.6%) cases. A histological upgrade of the Gleason score by fusion-guided biopsy was noted in 20/270 (7.4%) of all cancers found and by systematic biopsy in 31/270 (11.5%). Of all positive cases (clinically insignificant and significant cancer), 65/270 (24.1%) were detected only by fusion-guided biopsy, whereas 43/270 (15.9%) were detected only by systematic biopsy. Fusion-guided biopsy can detect more cases of prostate cancers than systematic biopsy alone, especially clinically significant cancer. However, the combination of both biopsy methods improves the detection rate and can help to identify clinically significant cancer.

Identifiants

pubmed: 35839747
pii: S0720-048X(22)00282-0
doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2022.110432
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

110432

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2022 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Auteurs

Julia Dorfinger (J)

St. John of God Hospital Vienna, Brothers of Mercy, Department of Urology Johannes-von-Gott-Platz 1, 1020 Vienna, Austria.

Anton Ponholzer (A)

St. John of God Hospital Vienna, Brothers of Mercy, Department of Urology Johannes-von-Gott-Platz 1, 1020 Vienna, Austria.

Michael Stolzlechner (M)

St. John of God Hospital Vienna, Brothers of Mercy, Department of Urology Johannes-von-Gott-Platz 1, 1020 Vienna, Austria.

Sebastian Lenart (S)

St. John of God Hospital Vienna, Brothers of Mercy, Department of Urology Johannes-von-Gott-Platz 1, 1020 Vienna, Austria; Paracelsus Medical University Salzburg, Department of Urology, Strubergasse 21, 5020 Salzburg, Austria.

Pascal Baltzer (P)

Medical University of Vienna, Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of Molecular and Gender Imaging, Waehringer Guertel 18-38, 1180 Vienna, Austria.

Michael Toepker (M)

Radiology Imaging Center, Diagnosezentrum Favoriten, Am Hauptbahnhof 2/4, 1100 Vienna, Austria. Electronic address: mt@dz10.at.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH