Cargando…
Analysis of the cause of missed diagnosis in mpMRI/TRUS fusion-guided targeted prostate biopsy
OBJECTIVES: To investigate the causes of missed diagnosis in mpMRI/TRUS fusion-guided targeted prostate biopsy. METHODS: The clinical data of 759 patients who underwent transperineal prostate biopsy from March 2021 to June 2021 at Nanjing DrumTower Hospital were retrospectively analyzed. Twenty-one...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9074335/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35513861 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12894-022-01021-8 |
Sumario: | OBJECTIVES: To investigate the causes of missed diagnosis in mpMRI/TRUS fusion-guided targeted prostate biopsy. METHODS: The clinical data of 759 patients who underwent transperineal prostate biopsy from March 2021 to June 2021 at Nanjing DrumTower Hospital were retrospectively analyzed. Twenty-one patients had MRI contraindications. Ultimately, 738 patients completed mpMRI/TRUS fusion-guided targeted prostate biopsy + 12-core transperineal systematic biopsy after mpMRI and PI-RADS scoring. The pathological diagnoses from targeted and systematic biopsy were compared to evaluate and analyze the reasons for missed diagnoses in targeted biopsy. RESULTS: A total of 388 prostate cancer patients were identified, including 37 (9%) missed diagnoses with targeted biopsy and 44 (11.34%) with systematic biopsy. Between the target biopsy missed diagnosis group and not missed diagnosis group, there was no significant difference in age (71.08 ± 7.11 vs. 71.80 ± 7.94), but PSA (13.63 ± 12.41 vs. 54.54 ± 177.25 ng/ml), prostate volume (61.82 ± 40.64 vs. 44.34 ± 25.07 cm(3)), PSAD (0.27 ± 0.28 vs. 1.07 ± 2.91), and ISUP grade [1(1) vs. 3(2)] were significantly different. The pathological results of the 37 targeted biopsy missed diagnoses were recompared with MRI: 21 prostate cancers were normal on MRI; 9 cancer areas were abnormal on MRI; and 7 cancer areas on MRI were PI-RADS 3. CONCLUSIONS: Early prostate cancer, large prostate, effect of local anesthesia, doctor–patient cooperation, MRI diagnosis, and operator technology were possible factors for missed diagnosis in targeted biopsy. Improvements imaging technology, greater experience, and personalized biopsy may lead to an accurate pathological diagnosis. |
---|