前列腺活检与根治性前列腺切除术ISUP分级的差异及相关因素

IF 0.3 4区 医学 Q4 Medicine Acta Medica Mediterranea Pub Date : 2021-09-27 DOI:10.32552/2021.actamedica.580
E. Ceyhan, Burak Yılmaz, B. Öztürk
{"title":"前列腺活检与根治性前列腺切除术ISUP分级的差异及相关因素","authors":"E. Ceyhan, Burak Yılmaz, B. Öztürk","doi":"10.32552/2021.actamedica.580","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: To assess the incoherence rates between prostate biopsies and radical prostatectomy specimens with the use of the International Society of Urological Pathology grading system and to identify the related factors. \nMaterials and Methods: 89 radical prostatectomy patients were analyzed retrospectively. Patients with Gleason score≥6 were included to the study. Patients’ prostate spesific antigen levels, digital rectal examination, prostate biopsy parameters, prostate cancer risk groups and final prostatectomy pathologies were examined. Gleason scores and International Society of Urological Pathology grades of prostate biopsy and prostatectomy specimens were compared. The coherence, upgrading and downgrading rates of pathologies assessed and related factors were identified. \nResults: Patients’ mean age was 63.1±6.0 years. Prostate spesific antigen levels ranged from 2.8 to 114.0ng/mL(mean:14.8±16.7). The mean number of cores biopsied was 10.9±3.1. Number of patients in low, intermediate and high risk group were 27(30.3%), 34(38.2%) and 28(31.5%) respectively. The coherence, upgrading and downgrading rates according to International Society of Urological Pathology grading were 49.4%, 33.7% and 16.9% respectively. The low risk prostate cancer group showed the most coherent pathologies with the rate of 70.4%(p<0.05, both for International Society of Urological Pathology grading and Gleason scoring). There was no significant relation between prostate spesific antigen level, number of cores biopsied, percentage of cancer involvement, presence of perineural invasion coherence, upgrading and downgrading. Also no significant difference found between coherent, upgrading and downgrading pathologies with respect to the time to radical prostatectomy. \nConclusion: The incoherence between prostate biopsy and radical prostatectomy is challenging. Risk of upgrading and downgrading should be considered in decision making. Low risk prostate cancer shows the most coherent pathology between prostate biopsy and radical prostatectomy.","PeriodicalId":50891,"journal":{"name":"Acta Medica Mediterranea","volume":"51 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Comparison of ISUP Grades Between Prostate Biopsy and Radical Prostatectomy: The Incoherence and Related Factors\",\"authors\":\"E. Ceyhan, Burak Yılmaz, B. Öztürk\",\"doi\":\"10.32552/2021.actamedica.580\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Objective: To assess the incoherence rates between prostate biopsies and radical prostatectomy specimens with the use of the International Society of Urological Pathology grading system and to identify the related factors. \\nMaterials and Methods: 89 radical prostatectomy patients were analyzed retrospectively. Patients with Gleason score≥6 were included to the study. Patients’ prostate spesific antigen levels, digital rectal examination, prostate biopsy parameters, prostate cancer risk groups and final prostatectomy pathologies were examined. Gleason scores and International Society of Urological Pathology grades of prostate biopsy and prostatectomy specimens were compared. The coherence, upgrading and downgrading rates of pathologies assessed and related factors were identified. \\nResults: Patients’ mean age was 63.1±6.0 years. Prostate spesific antigen levels ranged from 2.8 to 114.0ng/mL(mean:14.8±16.7). The mean number of cores biopsied was 10.9±3.1. Number of patients in low, intermediate and high risk group were 27(30.3%), 34(38.2%) and 28(31.5%) respectively. The coherence, upgrading and downgrading rates according to International Society of Urological Pathology grading were 49.4%, 33.7% and 16.9% respectively. The low risk prostate cancer group showed the most coherent pathologies with the rate of 70.4%(p<0.05, both for International Society of Urological Pathology grading and Gleason scoring). There was no significant relation between prostate spesific antigen level, number of cores biopsied, percentage of cancer involvement, presence of perineural invasion coherence, upgrading and downgrading. Also no significant difference found between coherent, upgrading and downgrading pathologies with respect to the time to radical prostatectomy. \\nConclusion: The incoherence between prostate biopsy and radical prostatectomy is challenging. Risk of upgrading and downgrading should be considered in decision making. Low risk prostate cancer shows the most coherent pathology between prostate biopsy and radical prostatectomy.\",\"PeriodicalId\":50891,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Acta Medica Mediterranea\",\"volume\":\"51 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-09-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Acta Medica Mediterranea\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.32552/2021.actamedica.580\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta Medica Mediterranea","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.32552/2021.actamedica.580","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:应用国际泌尿外科病理分级系统评估前列腺活检与根治性前列腺切除术标本的不一致性,并探讨相关因素。材料与方法:回顾性分析89例根治性前列腺切除术患者的临床资料。Gleason评分≥6的患者被纳入研究。检查患者前列腺特异性抗原水平、直肠指检、前列腺活检参数、前列腺癌危险人群及最终前列腺切除术病理。比较前列腺活检和前列腺切除术标本的Gleason评分和国际泌尿病理学会分级。确定了评估病理的一致性、升级率和降级率以及相关因素。结果:患者平均年龄63.1±6.0岁。前列腺特异性抗原水平范围为2.8 ~ 114.0ng/mL(平均值:14.8±16.7)。平均活检核数为10.9±3.1个。低危组27例(30.3%),中危组34例(38.2%),高危组28例(31.5%)。国际泌尿外科病理学会分级一致性为49.4%,升级率为33.7%,降级率为16.9%。低危前列腺癌组病理最一致,发生率为70.4%(国际泌尿病理学会分级和Gleason评分均p<0.05)。前列腺特异性抗原水平、活检核数、肿瘤受累百分比、神经周围浸润一致性、升级和降级之间无显著关系。在根治性前列腺切除术的时间方面,一致性、升级性和降级性病理之间也没有发现显著差异。结论:前列腺活检和根治性前列腺切除术之间的不一致性是具有挑战性的。在决策时应考虑升级和降级的风险。低危前列腺癌在前列腺活检和根治性前列腺切除术之间表现出最一致的病理。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
The Comparison of ISUP Grades Between Prostate Biopsy and Radical Prostatectomy: The Incoherence and Related Factors
Objective: To assess the incoherence rates between prostate biopsies and radical prostatectomy specimens with the use of the International Society of Urological Pathology grading system and to identify the related factors. Materials and Methods: 89 radical prostatectomy patients were analyzed retrospectively. Patients with Gleason score≥6 were included to the study. Patients’ prostate spesific antigen levels, digital rectal examination, prostate biopsy parameters, prostate cancer risk groups and final prostatectomy pathologies were examined. Gleason scores and International Society of Urological Pathology grades of prostate biopsy and prostatectomy specimens were compared. The coherence, upgrading and downgrading rates of pathologies assessed and related factors were identified. Results: Patients’ mean age was 63.1±6.0 years. Prostate spesific antigen levels ranged from 2.8 to 114.0ng/mL(mean:14.8±16.7). The mean number of cores biopsied was 10.9±3.1. Number of patients in low, intermediate and high risk group were 27(30.3%), 34(38.2%) and 28(31.5%) respectively. The coherence, upgrading and downgrading rates according to International Society of Urological Pathology grading were 49.4%, 33.7% and 16.9% respectively. The low risk prostate cancer group showed the most coherent pathologies with the rate of 70.4%(p<0.05, both for International Society of Urological Pathology grading and Gleason scoring). There was no significant relation between prostate spesific antigen level, number of cores biopsied, percentage of cancer involvement, presence of perineural invasion coherence, upgrading and downgrading. Also no significant difference found between coherent, upgrading and downgrading pathologies with respect to the time to radical prostatectomy. Conclusion: The incoherence between prostate biopsy and radical prostatectomy is challenging. Risk of upgrading and downgrading should be considered in decision making. Low risk prostate cancer shows the most coherent pathology between prostate biopsy and radical prostatectomy.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Acta Medica Mediterranea
Acta Medica Mediterranea 医学-医学:内科
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Acta Medica Mediterranea is an indipendent, international, English-language, peer-reviewed journal, online and open-access, designed for internists and phisicians. The journal publishes a variety of manuscript types, including review articles, original research, case reports and letters to the editor.
期刊最新文献
Older patients’ driving safety with the help of DRIVING SIMULATOR: Which cognitive test can predict better driving safety? Evaluation of the results of intra-articular platelet-rich plasma injections in patients with knee osteoarthritis Low-grade glial tumors: The experience of an oncology hospital in Türkiye High 30-day readmission rates in hospitalized patients with heart failure: Strengthening the need for a multidisciplinary and integrated approach Malignancy and Sarcoidosis: A Single Center Experience from Turkey
×
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