M. Ferriero, U. Anceschi, A. Bove, L. Bertini, R. Flammia, G. Zeccolini, B. de Concilio, G. Tuderti, R. Mastroianni, L. Misuraca, A. Brassetti, S. Guaglianone, M. Gallucci, A. Celia, G. Simone
{"title":"使用计算机辅助诊断(CAD)系统的融合US/MRI前列腺活检。","authors":"M. Ferriero, U. Anceschi, A. Bove, L. Bertini, R. Flammia, G. Zeccolini, B. de Concilio, G. Tuderti, R. Mastroianni, L. Misuraca, A. Brassetti, S. Guaglianone, M. Gallucci, A. Celia, G. Simone","doi":"10.23736/S0393-2249.20.04008-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BACKGROUND\nTo investigate the impact of Computer Aided Diagnostic (CAD) system on the detection rate of prostate cancer (PCa) in a series of fusion prostate biopsy (FPB).\n\n\nMETHODS\nTwo prospective transperineal FPB series (with or without CAD assistance) were analyzed and PCa detection rates compared with per patient and per target analyses. Chi-Square and Mann-Whitney test were used to compare categorical and continuous variables, respectively. Univariable and multivariable regression analyses were applied to identify predictors of any and clinically-significant (cs) PCa detection. Subgroup analyses were performed after stratifying for PIRADS Score and lesion location.\n\n\nRESULTS\nOut of 183 FPB, 89 were performed with CAD assistance. At per patient analysis the detection rate of any PCa and of cs PCa were 56.3% and 30.6%, respectively; the aid of CAD was negligible for either any PCa or csPCa detection rates (p=0.45 and p=0.99, respectively). Conversely in a per target analysis, CAD-assisted biopsy had significantly higher positive predictive value (PPV) for any PCa versus MRI-only group (58%vs37.8%, p=0.001). PI-RADS Score was the only independent predictor of any and csPCa, either in per patient or per target multivariable regression analysis (all p<0.029). In a subgroup per patient analysis of anterior/transitional zone lesions, csPCa detection rate was significantly higher in the CAD cohort (54.5%vs11.1%, respectively; p=0.028), and CAD assistance was the only predictor of csPCa detection (p=0.013).\n\n\nCONCLUSIONS\nCAD assistance for FPB seems to improve detection of csPCa located in anterior/transitional zone. Enhanced identification and improved contouring of lesions may justify higher diagnostic performance.","PeriodicalId":49015,"journal":{"name":"Minerva Urologica E Nefrologica","volume":"77 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-11-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Fusion US/MRI prostate biopsy using a Computer Aided Diagnostic (CAD) system.\",\"authors\":\"M. Ferriero, U. Anceschi, A. Bove, L. Bertini, R. Flammia, G. Zeccolini, B. de Concilio, G. Tuderti, R. Mastroianni, L. Misuraca, A. Brassetti, S. Guaglianone, M. Gallucci, A. Celia, G. Simone\",\"doi\":\"10.23736/S0393-2249.20.04008-4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"BACKGROUND\\nTo investigate the impact of Computer Aided Diagnostic (CAD) system on the detection rate of prostate cancer (PCa) in a series of fusion prostate biopsy (FPB).\\n\\n\\nMETHODS\\nTwo prospective transperineal FPB series (with or without CAD assistance) were analyzed and PCa detection rates compared with per patient and per target analyses. Chi-Square and Mann-Whitney test were used to compare categorical and continuous variables, respectively. Univariable and multivariable regression analyses were applied to identify predictors of any and clinically-significant (cs) PCa detection. Subgroup analyses were performed after stratifying for PIRADS Score and lesion location.\\n\\n\\nRESULTS\\nOut of 183 FPB, 89 were performed with CAD assistance. At per patient analysis the detection rate of any PCa and of cs PCa were 56.3% and 30.6%, respectively; the aid of CAD was negligible for either any PCa or csPCa detection rates (p=0.45 and p=0.99, respectively). Conversely in a per target analysis, CAD-assisted biopsy had significantly higher positive predictive value (PPV) for any PCa versus MRI-only group (58%vs37.8%, p=0.001). PI-RADS Score was the only independent predictor of any and csPCa, either in per patient or per target multivariable regression analysis (all p<0.029). In a subgroup per patient analysis of anterior/transitional zone lesions, csPCa detection rate was significantly higher in the CAD cohort (54.5%vs11.1%, respectively; p=0.028), and CAD assistance was the only predictor of csPCa detection (p=0.013).\\n\\n\\nCONCLUSIONS\\nCAD assistance for FPB seems to improve detection of csPCa located in anterior/transitional zone. Enhanced identification and improved contouring of lesions may justify higher diagnostic performance.\",\"PeriodicalId\":49015,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Minerva Urologica E Nefrologica\",\"volume\":\"77 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-11-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Minerva Urologica E Nefrologica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.23736/S0393-2249.20.04008-4\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Minerva Urologica E Nefrologica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.23736/S0393-2249.20.04008-4","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
Fusion US/MRI prostate biopsy using a Computer Aided Diagnostic (CAD) system.
BACKGROUND
To investigate the impact of Computer Aided Diagnostic (CAD) system on the detection rate of prostate cancer (PCa) in a series of fusion prostate biopsy (FPB).
METHODS
Two prospective transperineal FPB series (with or without CAD assistance) were analyzed and PCa detection rates compared with per patient and per target analyses. Chi-Square and Mann-Whitney test were used to compare categorical and continuous variables, respectively. Univariable and multivariable regression analyses were applied to identify predictors of any and clinically-significant (cs) PCa detection. Subgroup analyses were performed after stratifying for PIRADS Score and lesion location.
RESULTS
Out of 183 FPB, 89 were performed with CAD assistance. At per patient analysis the detection rate of any PCa and of cs PCa were 56.3% and 30.6%, respectively; the aid of CAD was negligible for either any PCa or csPCa detection rates (p=0.45 and p=0.99, respectively). Conversely in a per target analysis, CAD-assisted biopsy had significantly higher positive predictive value (PPV) for any PCa versus MRI-only group (58%vs37.8%, p=0.001). PI-RADS Score was the only independent predictor of any and csPCa, either in per patient or per target multivariable regression analysis (all p<0.029). In a subgroup per patient analysis of anterior/transitional zone lesions, csPCa detection rate was significantly higher in the CAD cohort (54.5%vs11.1%, respectively; p=0.028), and CAD assistance was the only predictor of csPCa detection (p=0.013).
CONCLUSIONS
CAD assistance for FPB seems to improve detection of csPCa located in anterior/transitional zone. Enhanced identification and improved contouring of lesions may justify higher diagnostic performance.
期刊介绍:
The journal Minerva Urologica e Nefrologica publishes scientific papers on nephrology and urology. Manuscripts may be submitted in the form of Minerva opinion editorials, editorial comments, original articles, video illustrated articles, review articles and letters to the Editor.