The Comparison of Magnetic Resonance Imaging/Transrectal Ultrasound Fusion Biopsies with Conventional Transrectal Biopsies in Prostate Cancer Detection

被引:0
作者
Baba, Dursun [1 ]
Balik, Ahmet Yildirim [1 ]
Yuksel, Alpaslan [1 ]
Senoglu, Yusuf [1 ]
机构
[1] Duzce Univ, Fac Med, Dept Urol, Duzce, Turkey
来源
UROONKOLOJI BULTENI-BULLETIN OF UROONCOLOGY | 2021年 / 20卷 / 04期
关键词
Prostate cancer; MRI-ultrasound fusion; prostate biopsy; targeted biopsy; DIAGNOSIS;
D O I
10.4274/uob.galenos.2021.2021.4.4
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Objective: The conventional technique for histological prostate cancer diagnosis is transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided random sampling of the peripheral prostate zone. However, due to method insufficiency and recent developments in prostate imaging, new biopsy methods were introduced. This study aimed to evaluate prostate cancer detection rates by the standard and magnetic resonance (MR) fusion biopsy methods. The main purpose of our study is to mutually evaluate prostate cancer detection rates and results of standard and cognitive MR fusion biopsy methods and share our experiences in this process. Materials and Methods: Patients, who underwent prostate biopsy due to elevated serum prostate-specific antigen levels (>4ng/mL) and/or suspicious rectal examination, were retrospectively evaluated. A total of 160 patients were included in the study between January 2018 and January 2021. Patients were divided into two groups according to the applied method, as standard biopsy (SB) and MR fusion biopsy. Results: Prostate cancer was reported in 25 (31.3%) of 80 patients who underwent SB, wherein 20 (25%) were determined with clinically significant cancer. Prostate cancer was reported in 30 (37.5%) of 80 patients who underwent MR fusion biopsy, wherein 25 (31%) were reported as clinically significant cancer. A statistically significant difference was found in detecting prostate cancer and clinically significant prostate cancer when the prostate imaging-Reporting and Data System (3,4,5) scores were compared with each other (p<0.05, p=0.00). The additional SB to MR-targeted fusion biopsy was statistically significant in prostate cancer diagnosis (p=0.01, p<0.05). Conclusion: The additional SB to targeted biopsy increased the detection rate of clinically significant prostate cancer. Larger randomized studies are needed to reach a consensus on the ideal biopsy technique.
引用
收藏
页码:210 / 214
页数:5
相关论文
共 50 条
[21]   Combination of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsies is not enough for identifying patients eligible for hemiablative focal therapy for prostate cancer [J].
Young Hyo Choi ;
Ji Woong Yu ;
Min Yong Kang ;
Hyun Hwan Sung ;
Byong Chang Jeong ;
Seong Il Seo ;
Seong Soo Jeon ;
Hyun Moo Lee ;
Hwang Gyun Jeon .
World Journal of Urology, 2019, 37 :2129-2135
[22]   Combination of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsies is not enough for identifying patients eligible for hemiablative focal therapy for prostate cancer [J].
Choi, Young Hyo ;
Yu, Ji Woong ;
Kang, Min Yong ;
Sung, Hyun Hwan ;
Jeong, Byong Chang ;
Seo, Seong Il ;
Jeon, Seong Soo ;
Lee, Hyun Moo ;
Jeon, Hwang Gyun .
WORLD JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2019, 37 (10) :2129-2135
[23]   Effect of lesion diameter and prostate volume on prostate cancer detection rate of magnetic resonance imaging: Transrectal-ultrasonography-guided fusion biopsies using cognitive targeting [J].
Ozden, Eriz ;
Akpinar, Cagri ;
Ibis, Arif ;
Kubilay, Eralp ;
Erden, Ayse ;
Yaman, Onder .
TURKISH JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2021, 47 (01) :22-29
[24]   Comparison of the Diagnostic Accuracy of Micro-ultrasound and Magnetic Resonance Imaging/Ultrasound Fusion Targeted Biopsies for the Diagnosis of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer [J].
Lughezzani, Giovanni ;
Saita, Alberto ;
Lazzeri, Massimo ;
Paciotti, Marco ;
Maffei, Davide ;
Lista, Giuliana ;
Hurle, Rodolfo ;
Buffi, Nicola Maria ;
Guazzoni, Giorgio ;
Casale, Paolo .
EUROPEAN UROLOGY ONCOLOGY, 2019, 2 (03) :329-332
[25]   Early experience with multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsies under visual transrectal ultrasound guidance in patients suspicious for prostate cancer undergoing repeated biopsy [J].
Boesen, Lars ;
Noergaard, Nis ;
Chabanova, Elizaveta ;
Logager, Vibeke ;
Balslev, Ingegerd ;
Mikines, Kari ;
Thomsen, Henrik S. .
SCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2015, 49 (01) :25-34
[26]   Prostate cancer detection using magnetic resonance imaging-transrectal ultrasound fusion biopsy: A retrospective cohort study [J].
Pratihar, Sarbartha Kumar ;
Khanna, Ashish ;
Vasudeo, Vivek ;
Gupta, Rahul ;
Saurabh, Nikhil ;
Kumar, Bhuwan ;
Ali, Mujahid ;
Akotkar, Shravika S. ;
Rawal, Sudhir Kumar ;
Singh, Amitabh .
INDIAN JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2023, 39 (04) :297-302
[27]   Comparison of prostate cancer detection rates and complications between transrectal ultrasound-guided transperineal and transrectal biopsies: a systematic review and meta-analysis [J].
Du, Jianhui ;
Chen, Shuang ;
Terris, Martha K. ;
Miyamoto, Hiroshi ;
Yu, Yanqin ;
Ying, Qiao .
TRANSLATIONAL ANDROLOGY AND UROLOGY, 2025, 14 (05) :1418-1428
[28]   Computer-aided transrectal ultrasound: does prostate HistoScanning™ improve detection performance of prostate cancer in repeat biopsies? [J].
Hamann, Moritz Franz ;
Hamann, C. ;
Trettel, A. ;
Juenemann, K. P. ;
Naumann, C. M. .
BMC UROLOGY, 2015, 15
[29]   Computer-aided transrectal ultrasound: does prostate HistoScanning™ improve detection performance of prostate cancer in repeat biopsies? [J].
Moritz Franz Hamann ;
C. Hamann ;
A. Trettel ;
K P Jünemann ;
C M Naumann .
BMC Urology, 15
[30]   Pathological Concordance between Prostate Biopsies and Radical Prostatectomy Using Transperineal Sector Mapping Biopsies: Validation and Comparison with Transrectal Biopsies [J].
Marra, Giancarlo ;
Eldred-Evans, David ;
Challacombe, Ben ;
Van Hemelrijck, Mieke ;
Polson, Alexander ;
Pomplun, Sabine ;
Foster, Christopher S. ;
Brown, Christian ;
Cahill, Declan ;
Gontero, Paolo ;
Popert, Rick ;
Muir, Gordon .
UROLOGIA INTERNATIONALIS, 2017, 99 (02) :168-176