Cargando…

The accuracy of prostate cancer diagnosis in biopsy-naive patients using combined magnetic resonance imaging and transrectal ultrasound fusion-targeted prostate biopsy

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to estimate whether multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI)-transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) fusion biopsy (FUS-TB) increases the detection rates of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) compared with TRUS-guided systematic biopsy (TRUS-GB). METHODS: Thi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Uno, Hiromi, Taniguchi, Tomoki, Seike, Kensaku, Kato, Daiki, Takai, Manabu, Iinuma, Koji, Horie, Kengo, Nakane, Keita, Koie, Takuya
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: AME Publishing Company 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8350232/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34430401
http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/tau-21-250
_version_ 1783735712267370496
author Uno, Hiromi
Taniguchi, Tomoki
Seike, Kensaku
Kato, Daiki
Takai, Manabu
Iinuma, Koji
Horie, Kengo
Nakane, Keita
Koie, Takuya
author_facet Uno, Hiromi
Taniguchi, Tomoki
Seike, Kensaku
Kato, Daiki
Takai, Manabu
Iinuma, Koji
Horie, Kengo
Nakane, Keita
Koie, Takuya
author_sort Uno, Hiromi
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: This study aimed to estimate whether multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI)-transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) fusion biopsy (FUS-TB) increases the detection rates of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) compared with TRUS-guided systematic biopsy (TRUS-GB). METHODS: This retrospective study focused on patients who underwent mpMRI before prostate biopsy (PB) with Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2 (PI-RADS v2) scores ≥3 and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level between 2.5 and 20 ng/mL. Before FUS-TB, the biopsy needle position was checked virtually using three-dimensional mapping. After confirming the position of the target within the prostate, biopsy needle was inserted and PB was performed. Suspicious lesions were generally targeted with 2 to 4 cores. Subsequently, 10–12 cores were biopsied for TRUS-GB. The primary endpoint was the PCa detection rate (PCDR) for patients with PCa who underwent combined FUS-TB and TRUS-GB. RESULTS: According to PI-RADS v2, 76.7% of the patients with PI-RADS v2 score ≥3 were diagnosed with PCa. The PCDRs in patients with PI-RADS v2 score of 4 or 5 were significantly higher than those in patients with PI-RADS v2 score of 3 (3 vs. 4, P<0.001; 3 vs. 5, P<0.001; 4 vs. 5, P=0.073). According to PCDR, the detection rates of PCa and csPCa in the FUS-TB were significantly higher than that in the TRUS-GB. CONCLUSIONS: Following detection of suspicious tumor lesions on mpMRI, FUS-TB use detects a higher number of PCa cases compared with TRUS-GB.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8350232
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher AME Publishing Company
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-83502322021-08-23 The accuracy of prostate cancer diagnosis in biopsy-naive patients using combined magnetic resonance imaging and transrectal ultrasound fusion-targeted prostate biopsy Uno, Hiromi Taniguchi, Tomoki Seike, Kensaku Kato, Daiki Takai, Manabu Iinuma, Koji Horie, Kengo Nakane, Keita Koie, Takuya Transl Androl Urol Original Article BACKGROUND: This study aimed to estimate whether multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI)-transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) fusion biopsy (FUS-TB) increases the detection rates of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) compared with TRUS-guided systematic biopsy (TRUS-GB). METHODS: This retrospective study focused on patients who underwent mpMRI before prostate biopsy (PB) with Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2 (PI-RADS v2) scores ≥3 and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level between 2.5 and 20 ng/mL. Before FUS-TB, the biopsy needle position was checked virtually using three-dimensional mapping. After confirming the position of the target within the prostate, biopsy needle was inserted and PB was performed. Suspicious lesions were generally targeted with 2 to 4 cores. Subsequently, 10–12 cores were biopsied for TRUS-GB. The primary endpoint was the PCa detection rate (PCDR) for patients with PCa who underwent combined FUS-TB and TRUS-GB. RESULTS: According to PI-RADS v2, 76.7% of the patients with PI-RADS v2 score ≥3 were diagnosed with PCa. The PCDRs in patients with PI-RADS v2 score of 4 or 5 were significantly higher than those in patients with PI-RADS v2 score of 3 (3 vs. 4, P<0.001; 3 vs. 5, P<0.001; 4 vs. 5, P=0.073). According to PCDR, the detection rates of PCa and csPCa in the FUS-TB were significantly higher than that in the TRUS-GB. CONCLUSIONS: Following detection of suspicious tumor lesions on mpMRI, FUS-TB use detects a higher number of PCa cases compared with TRUS-GB. AME Publishing Company 2021-07 /pmc/articles/PMC8350232/ /pubmed/34430401 http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/tau-21-250 Text en 2021 Translational Andrology and Urology. All rights reserved. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/Open Access Statement: This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0), which permits the non-commercial replication and distribution of the article with the strict proviso that no changes or edits are made and the original work is properly cited (including links to both the formal publication through the relevant DOI and the license). See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Original Article
Uno, Hiromi
Taniguchi, Tomoki
Seike, Kensaku
Kato, Daiki
Takai, Manabu
Iinuma, Koji
Horie, Kengo
Nakane, Keita
Koie, Takuya
The accuracy of prostate cancer diagnosis in biopsy-naive patients using combined magnetic resonance imaging and transrectal ultrasound fusion-targeted prostate biopsy
title The accuracy of prostate cancer diagnosis in biopsy-naive patients using combined magnetic resonance imaging and transrectal ultrasound fusion-targeted prostate biopsy
title_full The accuracy of prostate cancer diagnosis in biopsy-naive patients using combined magnetic resonance imaging and transrectal ultrasound fusion-targeted prostate biopsy
title_fullStr The accuracy of prostate cancer diagnosis in biopsy-naive patients using combined magnetic resonance imaging and transrectal ultrasound fusion-targeted prostate biopsy
title_full_unstemmed The accuracy of prostate cancer diagnosis in biopsy-naive patients using combined magnetic resonance imaging and transrectal ultrasound fusion-targeted prostate biopsy
title_short The accuracy of prostate cancer diagnosis in biopsy-naive patients using combined magnetic resonance imaging and transrectal ultrasound fusion-targeted prostate biopsy
title_sort accuracy of prostate cancer diagnosis in biopsy-naive patients using combined magnetic resonance imaging and transrectal ultrasound fusion-targeted prostate biopsy
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8350232/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34430401
http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/tau-21-250
work_keys_str_mv AT unohiromi theaccuracyofprostatecancerdiagnosisinbiopsynaivepatientsusingcombinedmagneticresonanceimagingandtransrectalultrasoundfusiontargetedprostatebiopsy
AT taniguchitomoki theaccuracyofprostatecancerdiagnosisinbiopsynaivepatientsusingcombinedmagneticresonanceimagingandtransrectalultrasoundfusiontargetedprostatebiopsy
AT seikekensaku theaccuracyofprostatecancerdiagnosisinbiopsynaivepatientsusingcombinedmagneticresonanceimagingandtransrectalultrasoundfusiontargetedprostatebiopsy
AT katodaiki theaccuracyofprostatecancerdiagnosisinbiopsynaivepatientsusingcombinedmagneticresonanceimagingandtransrectalultrasoundfusiontargetedprostatebiopsy
AT takaimanabu theaccuracyofprostatecancerdiagnosisinbiopsynaivepatientsusingcombinedmagneticresonanceimagingandtransrectalultrasoundfusiontargetedprostatebiopsy
AT iinumakoji theaccuracyofprostatecancerdiagnosisinbiopsynaivepatientsusingcombinedmagneticresonanceimagingandtransrectalultrasoundfusiontargetedprostatebiopsy
AT horiekengo theaccuracyofprostatecancerdiagnosisinbiopsynaivepatientsusingcombinedmagneticresonanceimagingandtransrectalultrasoundfusiontargetedprostatebiopsy
AT nakanekeita theaccuracyofprostatecancerdiagnosisinbiopsynaivepatientsusingcombinedmagneticresonanceimagingandtransrectalultrasoundfusiontargetedprostatebiopsy
AT koietakuya theaccuracyofprostatecancerdiagnosisinbiopsynaivepatientsusingcombinedmagneticresonanceimagingandtransrectalultrasoundfusiontargetedprostatebiopsy
AT unohiromi accuracyofprostatecancerdiagnosisinbiopsynaivepatientsusingcombinedmagneticresonanceimagingandtransrectalultrasoundfusiontargetedprostatebiopsy
AT taniguchitomoki accuracyofprostatecancerdiagnosisinbiopsynaivepatientsusingcombinedmagneticresonanceimagingandtransrectalultrasoundfusiontargetedprostatebiopsy
AT seikekensaku accuracyofprostatecancerdiagnosisinbiopsynaivepatientsusingcombinedmagneticresonanceimagingandtransrectalultrasoundfusiontargetedprostatebiopsy
AT katodaiki accuracyofprostatecancerdiagnosisinbiopsynaivepatientsusingcombinedmagneticresonanceimagingandtransrectalultrasoundfusiontargetedprostatebiopsy
AT takaimanabu accuracyofprostatecancerdiagnosisinbiopsynaivepatientsusingcombinedmagneticresonanceimagingandtransrectalultrasoundfusiontargetedprostatebiopsy
AT iinumakoji accuracyofprostatecancerdiagnosisinbiopsynaivepatientsusingcombinedmagneticresonanceimagingandtransrectalultrasoundfusiontargetedprostatebiopsy
AT horiekengo accuracyofprostatecancerdiagnosisinbiopsynaivepatientsusingcombinedmagneticresonanceimagingandtransrectalultrasoundfusiontargetedprostatebiopsy
AT nakanekeita accuracyofprostatecancerdiagnosisinbiopsynaivepatientsusingcombinedmagneticresonanceimagingandtransrectalultrasoundfusiontargetedprostatebiopsy
AT koietakuya accuracyofprostatecancerdiagnosisinbiopsynaivepatientsusingcombinedmagneticresonanceimagingandtransrectalultrasoundfusiontargetedprostatebiopsy