Value of systematic biopsy added to target biopsy for detecting significant cancer in men with Prostate Imaging and Reporting and Data System 5

IF 1.9 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL Precision and Future Medicine Pub Date : 2020-08-27 DOI:10.23838/pfm.2020.00015
T. An, B. K. Park
{"title":"Value of systematic biopsy added to target biopsy for detecting significant cancer in men with Prostate Imaging and Reporting and Data System 5","authors":"T. An, B. K. Park","doi":"10.23838/pfm.2020.00015","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose: To assess the value of systematic biopsy added to target biopsy for detecting significant cancer in men with Prostate Imaging and Reporting and Data System 5 (PIRADS 5). Methods: Between March 2014 and November 2018, 186 men had a PI-RADS 5 categorized as an index lesion on magnetic resonance imaging prior to transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided biopsy. Of these patients, 135 (group I) underwent target biopsy alone because of good depiction. The remaining 51 (group II) underwent target and systematic biopsies because of poor depiction. Significant cancer detection rates (CDRs) were compared between the groups. Which type of biopsies contributed to detecting significant cancer was evaluated in the group II. Results: Significant CDRs of the target biopsy were 67.4% (91/135) in the group I and 47.1% (24/51) in the group II (P=0.0173). However, when systematic biopsy was added to target biopsy, the significant CDR of the group II increased to 52.9% (27/51) (P=0.0900). Of the 27 significant cancers missed by target biopsy in the group II, three were detected by systematic biopsy alone. Moreover, systematic biopsy detected higher Gleason scores in two cases than target biopsy. Conclusion: Systematic biopsy contributes to detecting additional significant cancers in men with PI-RADS 5 partially visible on TRUS.","PeriodicalId":42462,"journal":{"name":"Precision and Future Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2020-08-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Precision and Future Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.23838/pfm.2020.00015","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Purpose: To assess the value of systematic biopsy added to target biopsy for detecting significant cancer in men with Prostate Imaging and Reporting and Data System 5 (PIRADS 5). Methods: Between March 2014 and November 2018, 186 men had a PI-RADS 5 categorized as an index lesion on magnetic resonance imaging prior to transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided biopsy. Of these patients, 135 (group I) underwent target biopsy alone because of good depiction. The remaining 51 (group II) underwent target and systematic biopsies because of poor depiction. Significant cancer detection rates (CDRs) were compared between the groups. Which type of biopsies contributed to detecting significant cancer was evaluated in the group II. Results: Significant CDRs of the target biopsy were 67.4% (91/135) in the group I and 47.1% (24/51) in the group II (P=0.0173). However, when systematic biopsy was added to target biopsy, the significant CDR of the group II increased to 52.9% (27/51) (P=0.0900). Of the 27 significant cancers missed by target biopsy in the group II, three were detected by systematic biopsy alone. Moreover, systematic biopsy detected higher Gleason scores in two cases than target biopsy. Conclusion: Systematic biopsy contributes to detecting additional significant cancers in men with PI-RADS 5 partially visible on TRUS.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在前列腺成像和报告及数据系统5中,在靶活检中添加系统活检对检测男性显著癌症的价值
目的:通过前列腺成像和报告与数据系统5(PIRADS 5),评估系统活检与靶活检相结合在检测男性显著癌症中的价值。方法:在2014年3月至2018年11月期间,186名男性在经直肠超声(TRUS)引导的活检前,在磁共振成像中将PI-RADS 5归类为指数病变。在这些患者中,135例(I组)由于描述良好而单独进行了靶活检。其余51例(II组)因描述不清而接受了靶向和系统活检。比较两组之间显著的癌症检出率(CDR)。第二组评估了哪种类型的活组织检查有助于发现显著的癌症。结果:靶活检的显著CDR在I组为67.4%(91/135),在II组为47.1%(24/51)(P=0.0173)。然而,当靶活检中加入系统活检时,II组的显著CDR增加到52.9%(27/51)(P=0.0900)。在II组靶活检遗漏的27种显著癌症中,有3种仅通过系统活检检测到。此外,系统活检在两个病例中检测到比目标活检更高的Gleason评分。结论:系统活检有助于检测TRUS上部分可见的PI-RADS 5男性的其他重要癌症。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Precision and Future Medicine
Precision and Future Medicine MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
15
审稿时长
10 weeks
期刊最新文献
Survival rate and death risk for associated pulmonary arterial hypertension: A retrospective population-based study Understanding hikikomori syndrome in clinical settings: a case series Development of colistin resistance via heteroresistance modeling in Klebsiella pneumoniae: A diagnostic study Paraneoplastic neurological syndrome associated with onconeural autoantibodies: report of two cases Durable response to first-line treatment with AZD3759 (zorifertinib) in a patient with epithelial growth factor receptor mutated non-small cell lung cancer and untreated multiple brain metastasis
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1