PIRADS ≥ 4 MRI lesion: Is performing systematic biopsies still essential for detecting clinically significant prostate cancer?

被引:0
|
作者
Taha, Fayek [1 ]
Branchu, Benjamin [2 ]
Demichel, Natacha [1 ]
Goudaimy, Sulaiman [1 ]
Bui, Alexandre Patrick [1 ]
Delchet, Ophelie [1 ]
Larre, Stephane [1 ]
机构
[1] CHU Reims, 1 rue Gen Koenig, F-51100 Reims, France
[2] Ctr Urol Trenel, 184 Pl Aristide Briand, F-69560 St Colombe, France
来源
FRENCH JOURNAL OF UROLOGY | 2024年 / 34卷 / 02期
关键词
Prostatic neoplasm; Image guided biopsy; Magnetic resonance imaging; MEN;
D O I
10.1016/j.fjurol.2024.102572
中图分类号
R5 [内科学]; R69 [泌尿科学(泌尿生殖系疾病)];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Introduction: In the era of targeted prostate biopsies, the necessity of performing randomized biopsies systematically is under question. Our objective is to evaluate the rate of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa), defined by presence of ISUP >= 2 prostate cancer, diagnosed only on randomized cores in case of a PIRADS >= 4 target lesion on MRI. The secondary objective is to evaluate whether specific variables can predict the presence of undetected csPCa in targeted biopsies. Methods: Retrospective data on targeted biopsies performed from 2015 to 2021 in our hospital were collected. Procedures were performed with MRI/Transrectal US fusion Trinity platform from Koelis (R) . All the MRI images were reviewed and the targets were classified using the PIRADS V2.1 classification. Inclusion criteria comprised procedures featuring at least one PIRADS >= 4 targeted lesion were included. All procedures consisted 1-4 targeted cores and 12 -core systematic biopsy. Results: We included 358 patients. In 44 patients (12.3%) csPCa was exclusively detected in randomized cores. Among these cases, only 12 patients (27.2%) showed no cancer on the targeted biopsies. Merely 4 patients (9.09%) lacked csPCa-positive cores on the same side as the index lesion. Factors such as PSA, PSA density, prostate volume, and digital rectal examination showed no significant association with the presence of csPCa exclusively on randomized cores. Likewise, the size, location, and PIRADS classification of the target demonstrated no significant impact. Conclusion: Our findings indicate that in 12.3% of cases, targeted biopsies alone are insufficient for detecting the presence of csPCa. As such, systematic biopsies remain necessary to date. Level of evidence: 4. (c) 2024 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] THE ABILITY OF MRI GUIDED BIOPSY TO DETECT CLINICALLY SIGNIFICANT PROSTATE CANCER: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW
    Robertson, Nicola
    Moore, Caroline
    Villers, Arnauld
    Klotz, Laurence
    Emberton, Mark
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2012, 187 (04): : E491 - E492
  • [32] A Diagnostic Accuracy Study of Targeted and Systematic Biopsies to Detect Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer, including a Model for the Partial Omission of Systematic Biopsies
    Morote, Juan
    Picola, Natalia
    Munoz-Rodriguez, Jesus
    Paesano, Nahuel
    Ruiz-Plazas, Xavier
    Munoz-Rivero, Marta V.
    Celma, Anna
    Manuel, Gemma Garcia-de
    Aisian, Ignacio
    Servian, Pol
    Abascal, Jose M.
    CANCERS, 2023, 15 (18)
  • [33] Prostate Cancer: Is There Still a Role for Systematic Biopsies? Yes
    Gandaglia, Giorgio
    Pellegrino, Antony
    Montorsi, Francesco
    Briganti, Alberto
    EUROPEAN UROLOGY OPEN SCIENCE, 2022, 38 : 10 - 11
  • [34] HOW MANY TRANSRECTAL FUSION PROSTATE BIOPSIES NEEDED FROM A LESION ON MRI FOR ACCURATE DIAGNOSIS OF SIGNIFICANT PROSTATE CANCER?
    Dothan, David
    Mamber, Ariel
    Shabaneh, Abd
    Beniaminov, Ofer
    Zilber, Sofia
    Chertin, Boris
    Koulikov, Dmitry
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2023, 209 : E994 - E994
  • [35] How many transrectal fusion prostate biopsies needed from a lesion on MRI for accurate diagnosis of significant prostate cancer?
    Dothan, D.
    Mamber, A.
    Benyaminov, O.
    Zilber, S.
    Chertin, B.
    Koulikov, D.
    EUROPEAN UROLOGY, 2023, 83 : S112 - S112
  • [36] Serum and urine biomarkers for detecting clinically significant prostate cancer
    Becerra, Maria F.
    Atluri, Venkatasai S.
    Bhattu, Amit S.
    Punnen, Sanoj
    UROLOGIC ONCOLOGY-SEMINARS AND ORIGINAL INVESTIGATIONS, 2021, 39 (10) : 686 - 690
  • [37] Construction and Comparison of Different Models in Detecting Prostate Cancer and Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer
    Zhou, Yongheng
    Qi, Wenqiang
    Cui, Jianfeng
    Zhong, Minglei
    Lv, Guangda
    Qu, Sifeng
    Chen, Shouzhen
    Li, Rongyang
    Shi, Benkang
    Zhu, Yaofeng
    FRONTIERS IN ONCOLOGY, 2022, 12
  • [38] Comparison of Multiparametric and Fast MRI Protocols in Detecting Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer and a Detailed Cost Analysis
    Alver, Kadir Han
    Yagci, Ahmet Baki
    Utebey, Ayse Ruksan
    Sen Turk, Nilay
    Ufuk, Furkan
    JOURNAL OF MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING, 2022, 56 (05) : 1437 - 1447
  • [39] Diagnostic performance of targeted transrectal MRI-Ultrasound fusion prostate biopsy in detecting clinically significant prostate cancer
    Yuwono, A.
    Tan, T. -W.
    Yeow, Y.
    Lee, C. -H.
    Tan, C. -H.
    Chong, K. -T.
    Lee, Y. -M.
    Png, K. -S.
    Tan, Y. -K.
    BJU INTERNATIONAL, 2017, 119 : 19 - 19
  • [40] THE EFFICIENCY OF MRI/ US FUSION TARGETED PROSTATE BIOPSIES IN FINDING CLINICALLY SIGNIFICANT PROSTATE CANCER COMPARED TO STANDARD TEMPLATE BIOPSY
    Rubin, Rachel
    Siddiqui, M. Minhaj
    George, Arvin
    Walton-Diaz, Annerleim
    Rais-Bahrami, Soroush
    Su, Daniel
    Shakir, Nabeel
    Rothwax, Jason
    Okoro, Chinonyerem
    Merino, Maria
    Turkbey, Baris
    Choyke, Peter
    Wood, Bradford
    Pinto, Peter
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2014, 191 (04): : E589 - E589