Dergiler / Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology / 2015 / Cilt: 21 - Sayı: 3

MRI-guided core needle biopsy of the prostate: acceptance and side effects

Sayfa
215–221
DOI
—
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

CONCLUSIONMRI-GB of the prostate seems to have fewer side effects and less pain intensity than TRUS-GB and was preferred by the majority of patients.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:PURPOSE We aimed to study side effects, complications, and patient acceptance of magnetic resonance imaging-guided real-time biopsy (MRI-GB) of the prostate.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:METHODSFifty-four men (49-78 years) with elevated prostate-specif-ic antigen after at least one negative systematic transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy (TRUS-GB) were included in a prospective clinical study.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:CONCLUSIONMRI-GB of the prostate seems to have fewer side effects and less pain intensity than TRUS-GB and was preferred by the majority of patients.
🔬Tür:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Kapsam:9 specimens
⚙️Değişkenler:Alan Parametreleri

Abstract

PURPOSE We aimed to study side effects, complications, and patient acceptance of magnetic resonance imaging-guided real-time biopsy (MRI-GB) of the prostate. METHODSFifty-four men (49-78 years) with elevated prostate-specif-ic antigen after at least one negative systematic transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy (TRUS-GB) were included in a prospective clinical study. Suspicious areas on images were selectively sampled by obtaining a median of four specimens (range, 1-9 specimens) using MRI-GB. In TRUS-GB, a medi-an of 10 specimens (range, 6-14 specimens) were obtained. Telephone interviews were conducted one week after outpa-tient MRI-GB, asking patients about pain and side effects (he-maturia, hemospermia, rectal bleeding, fever, and chills) of the two biopsy procedures and which of the two procedures they preferred. Multinomial regression analysis and Fisher's exact test was used to test for differences. RESULTSMRI-GB was preferred by 65% (35/54), and 82% (44/54) would undergo MRI-GB again. Pain intensity (P = 0.005) and bleeding duration (P = 0.004) were significantly lower for MRI-GB compared with TRUS-GB. Hematuria was less com-mon after MRI-GB compared with TRUS-GB (P = 0.006). A high correlation was given between bleeding intensity and bleeding duration for TRUS-GB (r=0.77) and pain intensity and pain duration for MRI-GB (r=0.65). Although hemosper-mia, rectal hemorrhage, fever, and chills were less common in MRI, they showed no statistically significant difference. CONCLUSIONMRI-GB of the prostate seems to have fewer side effects and less pain intensity than TRUS-GB and was preferred by the majority of patients.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

EGBERS, N., SCHWENKE, C., MAXEİNER, A., TEICHGRABER, U., FRANİEL, T. (2015). MRI-guided core needle biopsy of the prostate: acceptance and side effects. Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Cilt: 21 - Sayı: 3, 215–221. https://ajindex.com/articles/350070

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (13)

  1. Carter HB, Albertsen PC, Barry MJ, et al. Ear- ly detection of prostate cancer: AUA Guide- line. J Urol 2013
  2. [CrossRef] Quinlan MR, Casey RG, Flynn R, Grainger R, McDermott TE, Thornhill JA. A re- view of repeat prostate biopsies and the influence of technique on cancer detec- tion: our experience. Ir J Med Sci 2009
  3. [CrossRef] Roehrborn CG, Pickens GJ, Sanders JS. Diagnostic yield of repeated transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsies stratified by specific histopathologic diagnoses and prostate specific antigen levels. Urology 1996
  4. [CrossRef] Anastasiadis AG, Lichy MP, Nagele U, et al. MRI-guided biopsy of the prostate increases diagnostic performance in men with elevated or increasing PSA levels af- ter previous negative TRUS biopsies. Eur Urol 2006
  5. [CrossRef] Beyersdorff D, Winkel A, Hamm B, Lenk S, Loening SA, Taupitz M. MR imag- ing-guided prostate biopsy with a closed MR unit at 1.5 T: initial results. Radiology 2005
  6. [CrossRef] Hambrock T, Somford DM, Hoeks C, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging guided pros- tate biopsy in men with repeat negative biopsies and increased prostate specific an- tigen. J Urol 2010
  7. [CrossRef] Irani J, Fournier F, Bon D, Gremmo E, Dore B, Aubert J. Patient tolerance of transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy of the prostate. Br J Urol 1997
  8. [CrossRef] Palisaar J, Eggert T, Graefen M, Haese A, Huland H. Transrectal ultrasound-guided punch biopsies of the prostate. Indication, technique, results, and complications. Der Urologe Ausg A 2003
  9. [CrossRef] Peyromaure M, Ravery V, Messas A, Tou- blanc M, Boccon-Gibod L, Boccon-Gibod L. Pain and morbidity of an extensive prostate 10-biopsy protocol: a prospec- tive study in 289 patients. J Urol 2002
  10. [CrossRef] Franiel T, Stephan C, Erbersdobler A, et al. Areas suspicious for prostate cancer: MR-guided biopy in patients with at least one transrectal US-guided biopsy with a negative finding - multiparametric MR im- aging for detection and biopsy planning. Radiology 2011
  11. [CrossRef] Pondman KM, Futterer JJ, ten Haken B, et al. MR-guided biopsy of the prostate: an over- view of techniques and a systematic review. Eur Urol 2008
  12. [CrossRef] Breivik EK, Bjornsson GA, Skovlund E. A comparison of pain rating scales by sam- pling from clinical trial data. Clin J Pain 2000
  13. [CrossRef] Laubenthal H, Becker M, Neugebauer E. Guideline: Treatment of ac