Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar
AI InsightUrologists should have awareness of this restraint when utilizing the needle biopsy’s Gleason score in decision making and treatment planning.Key words: Accuracy, biopsy pathology, correlation, prostate cancer, prostatectomy pathology
📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale
Abstract
Background/aim: The aim of this study was to establish the relationship between the needle biopsy and the pathology result after radical prostatectomy administrated for prostate cancer. Materials and methods: We retrospectively analyzed 67 patients who had undergone radical prostatectomy from 2016 to 2019. All surgeries and all biopsies were performed in the third author’s urology department. Samples were collected through 12-core biopsy under local anesthesia. All specimens were studied in the pathology department of the third author’s center. The results evaluated were needle biopsies’ Gleason scores and prostatectomy specimens’ Gleason scores. Results: Inclusion criteria were not having any neo-adjuvant treatment and being treated with surgery after needle biopsy. Gleason scores obtained from needle biopsies and prostatectomy specimens were evaluated. The comparison revealed that 39% of the tumors were undergraded, 7% were overgraded, and 54% had exact scoring in needle biopsies and prostatectomy specimens according to the detailed Gleason scoring as primary and secondary metrics. The patients were grouped into five categories according to the ISUP 2014 prostate cancer grading system. The relationship was strong with 64% of results staying in the same group after the operation; nevertheless, the correlation remained weak based on the kappa coefficient. Conclusion: The information obtained from the needle biopsy is not a strong herald of the pathological result. Urologists should have awareness of this restraint when utilizing the needle biopsy’s Gleason score in decision making and treatment planning.Key words: Accuracy, biopsy pathology, correlation, prostate cancer, prostatectomy pathology