Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2016:2016:3794738.
doi: 10.1155/2016/3794738. Epub 2016 May 16.

Assessment of the Performance of Magnetic Resonance Imaging/Ultrasound Fusion Guided Prostate Biopsy against a Combined Targeted Plus Systematic Biopsy Approach Using 24-Core Transperineal Template Saturation Mapping Prostate Biopsy

Affiliations

Assessment of the Performance of Magnetic Resonance Imaging/Ultrasound Fusion Guided Prostate Biopsy against a Combined Targeted Plus Systematic Biopsy Approach Using 24-Core Transperineal Template Saturation Mapping Prostate Biopsy

Francis Ting et al. Prostate Cancer. 2016.

Abstract

Objective. To compare the performance of multiparametric resonance imaging/ultrasound fusion targeted biopsy (MRI/US-TBx) to a combined biopsy strategy (MRI/US-TBx plus 24-core transperineal template saturation mapping biopsy (TTMB)). Methods. Between May 2012 and October 2015, all patients undergoing MRI/US-TBx at our institution were included for analysis. Patients underwent MRI/US-TBx of suspicious lesions detected on multiparametric MRI +/- simultaneous TTMB. Subgroup analysis was performed on patients undergoing simultaneous MRI/US-TBx + TTMB. Primary outcome was PCa detection. Significant PCa was defined as ≥Gleason score (GS) 3 + 4 = 7 PCa. McNemar's test was used to compare detection rates between MRI/US-TBx and the combined biopsy strategy. Results. 148 patients underwent MRI/US-TBx and 80 patients underwent MRI/US-TBx + TTMB. In the MRI/US-TBx versus combined biopsy strategy subgroup analysis (n = 80), there were 55 PCa and 38 significant PCa. The detection rate for the combined biopsy strategy versus MRI/US-TBx for significant PCa was 49% versus 40% (p = 0.02) and for insignificant PCa was 20% versus 10% (p = 0.04), respectively. Eleven cases (14%) of significant PCa were detected exclusively on MRI/US-TBx and 7 cases (8.7%) of significant PCa were detected exclusively on TTMB. Conclusions. A combined biopsy approach (MRI/US-TBx + TTMB) detects more significant PCa than MRI/US-TBx alone; however, it will double the detection rate of insignificant PCa.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Gosselaar C., Kranse R., Roobol M. J., Roemeling S., Schröder F. H. The interobserver variability of digital rectal examination in a large randomized trial for the screening of prostate cancer. Prostate. 2008;68(9):985–993. doi: 10.1002/pros.20759. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Schroder F. H., van der Maas P., Beemsterboer P., Kruger A. B., Hoedemaeker R., Rietbergen J., et al. Evaluation of the digital rectal examination as a screening test for prostate cancer. Rotterdam section of the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer. Journal of the National Cancer Institute. 1998;90(23):1817–1823. doi: 10.1093/jnci/90.23.1817. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Thompson I. M., Ankerst D. P., Chi C., et al. Operating characteristics of prostate-specific antigen in men with an initial PSA level of 3.0 ng/mL or lower. The Journal of the American Medical Association. 2005;294(1):66–70. doi: 10.1001/jama.294.1.66. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Ukimura O., Coleman J. A., de la Taille A., et al. Contemporary role of systematic prostate biopsies: Indications, techniques, and implications for patient care. European Urology. 2013;63(2):214–230. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2012.09.033. - DOI - PubMed
    1. D'Amico A. V., Renshaw A. A., Arsenault L., Schultz D., Richie J. P. Clinical predictors of upgrading to gleason grade 4 or 5 disease at radical prostatectomy: potential implications for patient selection for radiation and androgen suppression therapy. International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics. 1999;45(4):841–846. doi: 10.1016/s0360-3016(99)00260-6. - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources