Cargando…

A prospective study on inter-operator variability in semi-robotic software-based MRI/TRUS-fusion targeted prostate biopsies

PURPOSE: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)/ultrasound-fusion prostate biopsy (FB) comprises multiple steps each of which can cause alterations in targeted biopsy (TB) accuracy leading to false-negative results. The aim was to assess the inter-operator variability of software-based fusion TB by target...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Derigs, Fabian, Doryumu, Samuel, Tollens, Fabian, Nörenberg, Dominik, Neuberger, Manuel, von Hardenberg, Jost, Michel, Maurice Stephan, Ritter, Manuel, Westhoff, Niklas
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8921147/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34825944
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00345-021-03891-3
Descripción
Sumario:PURPOSE: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)/ultrasound-fusion prostate biopsy (FB) comprises multiple steps each of which can cause alterations in targeted biopsy (TB) accuracy leading to false-negative results. The aim was to assess the inter-operator variability of software-based fusion TB by targeting the same MRI-lesions by different urologists. METHODS: In this prospective study, 142 patients eligible for analysis underwent software-based FB. TB of all lesions (n = 172) were carried out by two different urologists per patient (n = 31 urologists). We analyzed the number of mismatches [overall prostate cancer (PCa), clinically significant PCa (csPCa) and non-significant PCa (nsPCa)] between both performed TB per patient. In addition we evaluated factors contributing to inter-operator variability by uni- and multivariable analyses. RESULTS: In 11.6% of all MRI-lesions (10.6% of all patients) there was a mismatch between TB1 and TB2 in terms of overall prostate cancer (PCa detection. Regarding csPCa, patient-based mismatch occurred in 14.8% (n = 21). Overall PCa and csPCa detection rate of TB1 and TB2 did not differ significantly on a per-patient and per-lesion level. Analyses revealed a smaller lesion size as predictive for mismatches (OR 9.19, 95% CI 2.02–41.83, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Reproducibility and precision of targeting particularly small lesions is still limited although using software-based FB. Further improvements in image-fusion, segmentation, needle-guidance, and automatization are necessary. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00345-021-03891-3.