Dergiler / The European Research Journal / 2023 / Cilt: 9 Sayı: 5 - September 2023

Factors predicting transrectal ultrasound-guided systematic prostate biopsy failure

Sayfa
868–873
Yayın Tarihi
2023-09-04
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)

Conclusions: The success of systematic biopsy may be lower in patients with high prostate volume and low peripheral zone index lesion size.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:Objectives: To determine the factors that predict the failure of systematic prostate biopsy by examining the clinical, laboratory, and radiological parameters of patients for whom prostate cancer was detected by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-targeted biopsy but not by systematic biopsy.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:They were biopsy-naive patients and had lesions with a Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PIRADS) score ≥ 3 in the peripheral zone on MRI.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:Conclusions: The success of systematic biopsy may be lower in patients with high prostate volume and low peripheral zone index lesion size.
🔬Tür:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Kapsam:Genişletilmiş Akademik Örneklem
⚙️Değişkenler:Prostate biopsy · systematic · failure

Abstract

Objectives: To determine the factors that predict the failure of systematic prostate biopsy by examining the clinical, laboratory, and radiological parameters of patients for whom prostate cancer was detected by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-targeted biopsy but not by systematic biopsy. Methods: Patients were included in this study if they had undergone combined targeted and systematic biopsy and had cancer detected in the targeted biopsy. They were biopsy-naive patients and had lesions with a Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PIRADS) score ≥ 3 in the peripheral zone on MRI. The clinical, biochemical, and radiological findings of the groups with and without cancer detected in the systematic biopsy were compared. Results: A total of 100 patients had an index lesion in the peripheral zone and cancer detected by MRI-targeted biopsy. In 43 (43%) of the patients, no cancer was detected in the systematic biopsy, whereas it was detected in the other 57 (57%). Statistically significant differences were found between the two groups in terms of prostate volume and PSA density (p < 0.001 and p < 0.001, respectively). Moreover, the findings of univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses indicated that prostate volume and lesion size are independent predictors of systematic biopsy failure. Conclusions: The success of systematic biopsy may be lower in patients with high prostate volume and low peripheral zone index lesion size.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

ÇETİN, S., OLGUN, A., BULUT, E. C., KOPARAL, M., BAYRAMLİ, E., ŞEN, İ., SÖZEN, S. (2023). Factors predicting transrectal ultrasound-guided systematic prostate biopsy failure. The European Research Journal, Cilt: 9 Sayı: 5 - September 2023, 868–873. https://ajindex.com/articles/960958

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (12)

  1. Carter HB, Albertsen PC, Barry MJ, Etzioni R, Freedland SJ, Greene KL, et al. Early detection of prostate cancer: AUA Guideline. J Urol 2013;190:419-26
  2. Hegde JV, Mulkern RV, Panych LP, Fennessy FM, Fedorov A, Maier SE, et al. Multiparametric MRI of prostate cancer: an update on state-of-the-art techniques and their performance in detecting and localizing prostate cancer. J Magn Reson Imaging 2013;37:1035-54
  3. Panebianco V, Barchetti F, Sciarra A, Ciardi A, Indino EL, Papalia R, et al. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging vs. standard care in men being evaluated for prostate cancer: a randomized study. Urol Oncol 2015;33:17.e1-17.e7
  4. Barentsz JO, Richenberg J, Clements R, Choyke P, Verma S, Villeirs G, et al. ESUR prostate MR guidelines 2012. Eur Radiol 2012;22:746-57
  5. Cornford P, van den Bergh RC, Briers E, Van den Broeck T, Cumberbatch MG, De Santis M, et al. EAU-EANM-ESTRO-ESUR-SIOG guidelines on prostate cancer. Part II-2020 update: treatment of relapsing and metastatic prostate cancer. Eur Urol 2021;79:263-82
  6. Chang SD, Ghai S, Kim CK, Oto A, Giganti F, Moore CM. MRI Targeted Prostate Biopsy Techniques: AJR Expert Panel narrative review. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2021;217:1263-81
  7. Goldberg H, Ahmad AE, Chandrasekar T, Klotz L, Emberton M, Haider MA, et al. Comparison of magnetic resonance imaging and transrectal ultrasound informed prostate biopsy for prostate cancer diagnosis in biopsy naïve men: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Urol 2020;203:1085-93
  8. Ung JO, San Francisco IF, Regan MM, DeWOLF WC, Olumi AF. The relationship of prostate gland volume to extended needle biopsy on prostate cancer detection. J Urol 2003;169:130-5
  9. Uzzo RG, Wei JT, Waldbaum RS, Perlmutter AP, Byrne JC, Vaughan ED, Jr. The influence of prostate size on cancer detection. Urology 1995;46:831-6
  10. De La Taille A, Antiphon P, Salomon L, Cherfan M, Porcher R, Hoznek A, et al. Prospective evaluation of a 21-sample needle biopsy procedure designed to improve the prostate cancer detection rate. Urology 2003;61:1181-6
  11. Rosario DJ, Lane JA, Metcalfe C, Donovan JL, Doble A, Goodwin L, et al. Short term outcomes of prostate biopsy in men tested for cancer by prostate specific antigen: prospective evaluation within ProtecT study. BMJ 2012;344:d7894
  12. Loeb S, van den Heuvel S, Zhu X, Bangma CH, Schröder FH, Roobol MJ. Infectious complications and hospital admissions after prostate biopsy in a European randomized trial. Eur Urol 2012;61:1110-4. 1