Retrospective analysis of the learning curve in perineal robot-assisted prostate biopsy.
image‐guided biopsy
learning curve
perineal fusion biopsy
prostatic neoplasms
robot‐assisted surgery
Journal
The Prostate
ISSN: 1097-0045
Titre abrégé: Prostate
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8101368
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
02 Jun 2024
02 Jun 2024
Historique:
revised:
02
05
2024
received:
08
02
2024
accepted:
21
05
2024
medline:
2
6
2024
pubmed:
2
6
2024
entrez:
2
6
2024
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
Magnetic resonance imaging-transrectal ultrasound (MRI-TRUS)-fusion biopsy (FBx) of the prostate allows targeted sampling of suspicious lesions within the prostate, identified by multiparametric MRI. Due to its reliable results and feasibility, perineal MRI/TRUS FBx is now the gold standard for prostate cancer (PC) diagnosis. There are various systems for performing FBx on the market, for example, software-based, semirobotic, or robot-assisted platform solutions. Their semiautomated workflow promises high process quality independent of the surgeon's experience. The aim of this study was to analyze how the surgeon's experience influences the cancer detection rate (CDR) via targeted biopsy (TB) and the procedure's duration in robot-assisted FBx. A total of 1716 men who underwent robot-assisted FBx involving a combination of targeted and systematic sampling between October 2015 and April 2022 were analyzed. We extracted data from the patients' electronic medical records retrospectively. Primary endpoints were the CDR by TB and the procedure's duration. For our analysis, surgeons were divided into three levels of experience: ≤20 procedures (little), 21-100 procedures (intermediate), and >100 procedures (high). Statistical analysis was performed via regression analyses and group comparisons. Median age, prostate-specific antigen level, and prostate volume of the cohort were 67 (±7.7) years, 8.13 (±9.4) ng/mL, and 53 (±34.2) mL, respectively. Median duration of the procedure was 26 (±10.9) min. The duration decreased significantly with the surgeon's increasing experience from 35.1 (little experience) to 28.4 (intermediate experience) to 24.0 min (high experience) (p < 0.001). Using TB only, significant PC (sPC) was diagnosed in 872/1758 (49.6%) of the men. The CDR revealed no significant correlation with the surgeon's experience in either group comparison (p = 0.907) or in regression analysis (p = 0.65). While the duration of this procedure decreases with increasing experience, the detection rate of sPC in TB is not significantly associated with the experience of the surgeon performing robot-assisted FBx. This robot-assisted biopsy system's diagnostic accuracy therefore appears to be independent of experience.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Informations de copyright
© 2024 The Author(s). The Prostate published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.
Références
Rouvière O, Puech P, Renard‐Penna R, et al. Use of prostate systematic and targeted biopsy on the basis of multiparametric MRI in biopsy‐naive patients (MRI‐FIRST): a prospective, multicentre, paired diagnostic study. Lancet Oncol. 2019;20(1):100‐109.
EAU Guidelines. Edn. presented at the EAU Annual Congress Milan 2023. ISBN 978‐94‐92671‐19‐6. EAU Guidelines Office; 2023.
Klingebiel M, Arsov C, Ullrich T, et al. Reasons for missing clinically significant prostate cancer by targeted magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound fusion‐guided biopsy. Eur J Radiol. 2021;137:109587.
Muthigi A, George AK, Sidana A, et al. Missing the mark: prostate cancer upgrading by systematic biopsy over magnetic resonance imaging/transrectal ultrasound fusion biopsy. J Urol. 2017;197(2):327‐334.
Coker MA, Glaser ZA, Gordetsky JB, Thomas JV, Rais‐Bahrami S. Targets missed: predictors of MRI‐targeted biopsy failing to accurately localize prostate cancer found on systematic biopsy. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2018;21(4):549‐555.
Williams C, Ahdoot M, Daneshvar MA, et al. Why does magnetic resonance imaging‐targeted biopsy miss clinically significant cancer? J Urol. 2022;207(1):95‐107.
Gortz M, Nyarangi‐Dix JN, Pursche L, et al. Impact of surgeon's experience in rigid versus elastic MRI/TRUS‐fusion biopsy to detect significant prostate cancer using targeted and systematic cores. Cancers. 2022;14(4):886.
Stabile A, Dell'Oglio P, Gandaglia G, et al. Not all multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging‐targeted biopsies are equal: the impact of the type of approach and operator expertise on the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer. Eur Urol Oncol. 2018;1(2):120‐128.
Hsieh PF, Li PI, Lin WC, et al. Learning curve of transperineal MRI/US fusion prostate biopsy: 4‐year experience. Life. 2023;13(3):638.
Halstuch D, Baniel J, Lifshitz D, Sela S, Ber Y, Margel D. Characterizing the learning curve of MRI‐US fusion prostate biopsies. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2019;22(4):546‐551.
Xu L, Ye NY, Lee A, et al. Learning curve for magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound fusion prostate biopsy in detecting prostate cancer using cumulative sum analysis. Curr Urol. 2023;17(3):159‐164.
Jahnen M, Amiel T, Wagner T, et al. Does experience change the role of systematic biopsy during MRI‐fusion biopsy of the prostate? World J Urol. 2023;41(10):2699‐2705.
Kroenig M, Schaal K, Benndorf M, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of robot‐guided, software based transperineal MRI/TRUS fusion biopsy of the prostate in a high risk population of previously biopsy negative men. BioMed Res Int. 2016;2016:1‐6.
Kuru TH, Wadhwa K, Chang RTM, et al. Definitions of terms, processes and a minimum dataset for transperineal prostate biopsies: a standardization approach of the Ginsburg Study Group for enhanced prostate diagnostics. BJU Int. 2013;112(5):568‐577.
Oerther B, Engel H, Bamberg F, Sigle A, Gratzke C, Benndorf M. Cancer detection rates of the PI‐RADSv2.1 assessment categories: systematic review and meta‐analysis on lesion level and patient level. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2022;25(2):256‐263.
Westhoff N, Haumann H, Kriegmair MC, et al. Association of training level and outcome of software‐based image fusion‐guided targeted prostate biopsies. World J Urol. 2019;37(10):2119‐2127.
Sorce G, Stabile A, Lucianò R, et al. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate underestimates tumour volume of small visible lesions. BJU Int 2022;129(2):201‐207.