scholarly journals Detection of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer by Using Abbreviated Biparametric Prostate MR Imaging

Radiology ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 286 (3) ◽  
pp. 1093-1094 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yoshiko Ueno ◽  
Tsutomu Tamada ◽  
Satoru Takahashi
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Mr Imaging ◽  
Clinically Significant

scholarly journals Detection of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer: Short Dual–Pulse Sequence versus Standard Multiparametric MR Imaging—A Multireader Study

Radiology ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 284 (3) ◽  
pp. 725-736 ◽  
Author(s):  
Borna K. Barth ◽  
Pieter J. L. De Visschere ◽  
Alexander Cornelius ◽  
Carlos Nicolau ◽  
Hebert Alberto Vargas ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Mr Imaging ◽  
Pulse Sequence ◽  
Sequence Versus ◽  
Clinically Significant

scholarly journals Multiparametric MR Imaging for Detection of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer: A Validation Cohort Study with Transperineal Template Prostate Mapping as the Reference Standard

Radiology ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 268 (3) ◽  
pp. 761-769 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nimalan Arumainayagam ◽  
Hashim U. Ahmed ◽  
Caroline M. Moore ◽  
Alex Freeman ◽  
Clare Allen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Cohort Study ◽  
Mr Imaging ◽  
Validation Cohort ◽  
Reference Standard ◽  
Clinically Significant

Efficacy of 3T Multiparametric MR Imaging followed by 3T in-Bore MR-Guided Biopsy for Detection of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer Based on PIRADSv2.1 Score

2020 ◽  
Vol 31 (10) ◽  
pp. 1619-1626
Author(s):  
Melina Hosseiny ◽  
Ely R. Felker ◽  
Afshin Azadikhah ◽  
Voraparee Suvannarerg ◽  
James Sayre ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Mr Imaging ◽  
Guided Biopsy ◽  
Clinically Significant

Investigation of the optimal b value in diffusion weighted MR imaging for diagnosis of prostate cancer at 3-T

2015 ◽  
Vol 36 (4) ◽  
pp. 402
Author(s):  
Qing-song YANG ◽  
Zhen WANG ◽  
Yu-kun CHEN ◽  
Lu-guang CHEN ◽  
Chao MA ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Mr Imaging ◽  
B Value ◽  
Diffusion Weighted

scholarly journals Study protocol for a single-centre non-inferior randomised controlled trial on a novel three-dimensional matrix positioning-based cognitive fusion-targeted biopsy and software-based fusion-targeted biopsy for the detection rate of clinically significant prostate cancer in men without a prior biopsy

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. e041427
Author(s):  
Biming He ◽  
Rongbing Li ◽  
Dongyang Li ◽  
Liqun Huang ◽  
Xiaofei Wen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Detection Rate ◽  
Three Dimensional ◽  
Multiparametric Mri ◽  
Fusion Method ◽  
Targeted Biopsy ◽  
Cognitive Fusion ◽  
Single Centre ◽  
Clinically Significant ◽  
Randomised Controlled

IntroductionThe classical pathway for diagnosing prostate cancer is systematic 12-core biopsy under the guidance of transrectal ultrasound, which tends to underdiagnose the clinically significant tumour and overdiagnose the insignificant disease. Another pathway named targeted biopsy is using multiparametric MRI to localise the tumour precisely and then obtain the samples from the suspicious lesions. Targeted biopsy, which is mainly divided into cognitive fusion method and software-based fusion method, is getting prevalent for its good performance in detecting significant cancer. However, the preferred targeted biopsy technique in detecting clinically significant prostate cancer between cognitive fusion and software-based fusion is still beyond consensus.Methods and analysisThis trial is a prospective, single-centre, randomised controlled and non-inferiority study in which all men suspicious to have clinically significant prostate cancer are included. This study aims to determine whether a novel three-dimensional matrix positioning cognitive fusion-targeted biopsy is non-inferior to software-based fusion-targeted biopsy in the detection rate of clinically significant cancer in men without a prior biopsy. The main inclusion criteria are men with elevated serum prostate-specific antigen above 4–20 ng/mL or with an abnormal digital rectal examination and have never had a biopsy before. A sample size of 602 participants allowing for a 10% loss will be recruited. All patients will undergo a multiparametric MRI examination, and those who fail to be found with a suspicious lesion, with the anticipation of half of the total number, will be dropped. The remaining participants will be randomly allocated to cognitive fusion-targeted biopsy (n=137) and software-based fusion-targeted biopsy (n=137). The primary outcome is the detection rate of clinically significant prostate cancer for cognitive fusion-targeted biopsy and software-based fusion-targeted biopsy in men without a prior biopsy. The clinically significant prostate cancer will be defined as the International Society of Urological Pathology grade group 2 or higher.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval was obtained from the ethics committee of Shanghai East Hospital, Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China. The results of the study will be disseminated and published in international peer-reviewed journals.Trial registration numberClinicalTrials.gov Registry (NCT04271527).

Naive patients with suspicious prostate cancer and positive multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mp-MRI): is it time for fusion target biopsy alone?

2021 ◽  
pp. 205141582110237
Author(s):  
Enrico Checcucci ◽  
Sabrina De Cillis ◽  
Daniele Amparore ◽  
Diletta Garrou ◽  
Roberta Aimar ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Magnetic Resonance Imaging ◽  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Magnetic Resonance ◽  
Detection Rate ◽  
Resonance Imaging ◽  
Fusion Biopsy ◽  
Grade Group ◽  
Final Pathology ◽  
Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging ◽  
Clinically Significant

Objectives: To determine if standard biopsy still has a role in the detection of prostate cancer or clinically significant prostate cancer in biopsy-naive patients with positive multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging. Materials and methods: We extracted, from our prospective maintained fusion biopsy database, patients from March 2014 to December 2018. The detection rate of prostate cancer and clinically significant prostate cancer and complication rate were analysed in a cohort of patients who underwent fusion biopsy alone (group A) or fusion biopsy plus standard biopsy (group B). The International Society of Urological Pathology grade group determined on prostate biopsy with the grade group determined on final pathology among patients who underwent radical prostatectomy were compared. Results: Prostate cancer was found in 249/389 (64.01%) and 215/337 (63.8%) patients in groups A and B, respectively ( P=0.98), while the clinically significant prostate cancer detection rate was 57.8% and 55.1% ( P=0.52). No significant differences in complications were found. No differences in the upgrading rate between biopsy and final pathology finding after radical prostatectomy were recorded. Conclusions: In biopsy-naive patients, with suspected prostate cancer and positive multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging the addition of standard biopsy to fusion biopsy did not increase significantly the detection rate of prostate cancer or clinically significant prostate cancer. Moreover, the rate of upgrading of the cancer grade group between biopsy and final pathology was not affected by the addition of standard biopsy. Level of evidence: Not applicable for this multicentre audit.

scholarly journals Evaluation of the Ginsburg Scheme: Where Is Significant Prostate Cancer Missed?

Cancers ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (10) ◽  
pp. 2502
Author(s):  
August Sigle ◽  
Cordula A. Jilg ◽  
Timur H. Kuru ◽  
Nadine Binder ◽  
Jakob Michaelis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Logistic Regression ◽  
Regression Analysis ◽  
Cancer Detection ◽  
Logistic Regression Analysis ◽  
Anterior Region ◽  
Targeted Biopsy ◽  
Detection Rates ◽  
Clinically Significant ◽  
Systematic Biopsy

Background: Systematic biopsy (SB) according to the Ginsburg scheme (GBS) is widely used to complement MRI-targeted biopsy (MR-TB) for optimizing the diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer (sPCa). Knowledge of the GBS’s blind sectors where sPCa is missed is crucial to improve biopsy strategies. Methods: We analyzed cancer detection rates in 1084 patients that underwent MR-TB and SB. Cancerous lesions that were missed or underestimated by GBS were re-localized onto a prostate map encompassing Ginsburg sectors and blind-sectors (anterior, central, basodorsal and basoventral). Logistic regression analysis (LRA) and prostatic configuration analysis were applied to identify predictors for missing sPCa with the GBS. Results: GBS missed sPCa in 39 patients (39/1084, 3.6%). In 27 cases (27/39, 69.2%), sPCa was missed within a blind sector, with 17/39 lesions localized in the anterior region (43.6%). Neither LRA nor prostatic configuration analysis identified predictors for missing sPCa with the GBS. Conclusions: This is the first study to analyze the distribution of sPCa missed by the GBS. GBS misses sPCa in few men only, with the majority localized in the anterior region. Adding blind sectors to GBS defined a new sector map of the prostate suited for reporting histopathological biopsy results.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document