Cargando…

Detection rate of clinically significant prostate cancer in magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasonography‐fusion transperineal targeted biopsy for lesions with a prostate imaging reporting and data system version 2 score of 3–5

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the detection rates of clinically significant prostate cancer classified according to the prostate imaging reporting and data system scoring system using magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound rigid fusion targeted biopsy. METHODS: A total of 339 patients underwent transperine...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hakozaki, Yuji, Matsushima, Hisashi, Murata, Taro, Masuda, Tomoko, Hirai, Yoko, Oda, Mai, Kawauchi, Nobuo, Yokoyama, Munehiro, Kume, Haruki
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7379286/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30461076
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/iju.13842
_version_ 1783562606137573376
author Hakozaki, Yuji
Matsushima, Hisashi
Murata, Taro
Masuda, Tomoko
Hirai, Yoko
Oda, Mai
Kawauchi, Nobuo
Yokoyama, Munehiro
Kume, Haruki
author_facet Hakozaki, Yuji
Matsushima, Hisashi
Murata, Taro
Masuda, Tomoko
Hirai, Yoko
Oda, Mai
Kawauchi, Nobuo
Yokoyama, Munehiro
Kume, Haruki
author_sort Hakozaki, Yuji
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the detection rates of clinically significant prostate cancer classified according to the prostate imaging reporting and data system scoring system using magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound rigid fusion targeted biopsy. METHODS: A total of 339 patients underwent transperineal magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound rigid fusion targeted biopsy in our institution between January 2015 and July 2017. Patients with prostate imaging reporting and data system category 1 or 2 and those with a pre‐biopsy prostate‐specific antigen value of >30 ng/mL were excluded from this study. Finally, 310 patients were recruited. RESULTS: The detection rates of clinically significant prostate cancer with prostate imaging reporting and data system category 3, 4, and 5 were 1.0% (1/98), 35.1% (47/134) and 73.1% (57/78), respectively. The factors affecting the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer with prostate imaging reporting and data system categories 4 and 5 were: (i) prostate imaging reporting and data system category 5; (ii) prostate volume <40 cc; (iii) no previous biopsy; (iv) lesion located in the peripheral zone; and (v) prostate‐specific antigen density >0.35 ng/mL/mL. CONCLUSIONS: The detection rate of clinically significant prostate cancer on magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound rigid fusion targeted biopsy is very low in patients with prostate imaging reporting and data system category 3; therefore, patients with this classification should not undergo targeted biopsy. Prostate‐specific antigen density, prostate volume, locations of suspected cancer and history of biopsy should be considered to predict the detection rate of clinically significant prostate cancer with prostate imaging reporting and data system categories 4 and 5.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7379286
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-73792862020-07-24 Detection rate of clinically significant prostate cancer in magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasonography‐fusion transperineal targeted biopsy for lesions with a prostate imaging reporting and data system version 2 score of 3–5 Hakozaki, Yuji Matsushima, Hisashi Murata, Taro Masuda, Tomoko Hirai, Yoko Oda, Mai Kawauchi, Nobuo Yokoyama, Munehiro Kume, Haruki Int J Urol Original Articles: Clinical Investigation OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the detection rates of clinically significant prostate cancer classified according to the prostate imaging reporting and data system scoring system using magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound rigid fusion targeted biopsy. METHODS: A total of 339 patients underwent transperineal magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound rigid fusion targeted biopsy in our institution between January 2015 and July 2017. Patients with prostate imaging reporting and data system category 1 or 2 and those with a pre‐biopsy prostate‐specific antigen value of >30 ng/mL were excluded from this study. Finally, 310 patients were recruited. RESULTS: The detection rates of clinically significant prostate cancer with prostate imaging reporting and data system category 3, 4, and 5 were 1.0% (1/98), 35.1% (47/134) and 73.1% (57/78), respectively. The factors affecting the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer with prostate imaging reporting and data system categories 4 and 5 were: (i) prostate imaging reporting and data system category 5; (ii) prostate volume <40 cc; (iii) no previous biopsy; (iv) lesion located in the peripheral zone; and (v) prostate‐specific antigen density >0.35 ng/mL/mL. CONCLUSIONS: The detection rate of clinically significant prostate cancer on magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound rigid fusion targeted biopsy is very low in patients with prostate imaging reporting and data system category 3; therefore, patients with this classification should not undergo targeted biopsy. Prostate‐specific antigen density, prostate volume, locations of suspected cancer and history of biopsy should be considered to predict the detection rate of clinically significant prostate cancer with prostate imaging reporting and data system categories 4 and 5. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2018-11-21 2019-02 /pmc/articles/PMC7379286/ /pubmed/30461076 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/iju.13842 Text en © 2018 The Authors. International Journal of Urology published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of the Japanese Urological Association. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
spellingShingle Original Articles: Clinical Investigation
Hakozaki, Yuji
Matsushima, Hisashi
Murata, Taro
Masuda, Tomoko
Hirai, Yoko
Oda, Mai
Kawauchi, Nobuo
Yokoyama, Munehiro
Kume, Haruki
Detection rate of clinically significant prostate cancer in magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasonography‐fusion transperineal targeted biopsy for lesions with a prostate imaging reporting and data system version 2 score of 3–5
title Detection rate of clinically significant prostate cancer in magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasonography‐fusion transperineal targeted biopsy for lesions with a prostate imaging reporting and data system version 2 score of 3–5
title_full Detection rate of clinically significant prostate cancer in magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasonography‐fusion transperineal targeted biopsy for lesions with a prostate imaging reporting and data system version 2 score of 3–5
title_fullStr Detection rate of clinically significant prostate cancer in magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasonography‐fusion transperineal targeted biopsy for lesions with a prostate imaging reporting and data system version 2 score of 3–5
title_full_unstemmed Detection rate of clinically significant prostate cancer in magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasonography‐fusion transperineal targeted biopsy for lesions with a prostate imaging reporting and data system version 2 score of 3–5
title_short Detection rate of clinically significant prostate cancer in magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasonography‐fusion transperineal targeted biopsy for lesions with a prostate imaging reporting and data system version 2 score of 3–5
title_sort detection rate of clinically significant prostate cancer in magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasonography‐fusion transperineal targeted biopsy for lesions with a prostate imaging reporting and data system version 2 score of 3–5
topic Original Articles: Clinical Investigation
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7379286/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30461076
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/iju.13842
work_keys_str_mv AT hakozakiyuji detectionrateofclinicallysignificantprostatecancerinmagneticresonanceimagingandultrasonographyfusiontransperinealtargetedbiopsyforlesionswithaprostateimagingreportinganddatasystemversion2scoreof35
AT matsushimahisashi detectionrateofclinicallysignificantprostatecancerinmagneticresonanceimagingandultrasonographyfusiontransperinealtargetedbiopsyforlesionswithaprostateimagingreportinganddatasystemversion2scoreof35
AT muratataro detectionrateofclinicallysignificantprostatecancerinmagneticresonanceimagingandultrasonographyfusiontransperinealtargetedbiopsyforlesionswithaprostateimagingreportinganddatasystemversion2scoreof35
AT masudatomoko detectionrateofclinicallysignificantprostatecancerinmagneticresonanceimagingandultrasonographyfusiontransperinealtargetedbiopsyforlesionswithaprostateimagingreportinganddatasystemversion2scoreof35
AT hiraiyoko detectionrateofclinicallysignificantprostatecancerinmagneticresonanceimagingandultrasonographyfusiontransperinealtargetedbiopsyforlesionswithaprostateimagingreportinganddatasystemversion2scoreof35
AT odamai detectionrateofclinicallysignificantprostatecancerinmagneticresonanceimagingandultrasonographyfusiontransperinealtargetedbiopsyforlesionswithaprostateimagingreportinganddatasystemversion2scoreof35
AT kawauchinobuo detectionrateofclinicallysignificantprostatecancerinmagneticresonanceimagingandultrasonographyfusiontransperinealtargetedbiopsyforlesionswithaprostateimagingreportinganddatasystemversion2scoreof35
AT yokoyamamunehiro detectionrateofclinicallysignificantprostatecancerinmagneticresonanceimagingandultrasonographyfusiontransperinealtargetedbiopsyforlesionswithaprostateimagingreportinganddatasystemversion2scoreof35
AT kumeharuki detectionrateofclinicallysignificantprostatecancerinmagneticresonanceimagingandultrasonographyfusiontransperinealtargetedbiopsyforlesionswithaprostateimagingreportinganddatasystemversion2scoreof35