The detection of significant prostate cancer is correlated with the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) in MRI/transrectal ultrasound fusion biopsy

被引:87
|
作者
Cash, Hannes [1 ]
Maxeiner, Andreas [1 ]
Stephan, Carsten [1 ]
Fischer, Thomas [2 ]
Durmus, Tahir [2 ]
Holzmann, Josephine [1 ]
Asbach, Patrick [2 ]
Haas, Matthias [2 ]
Hinz, Stefan [1 ]
Neymeyer, Joerg [1 ]
Miller, Kurt [1 ]
Guenzel, Karsten [1 ]
Kempkensteffen, Carsten [1 ]
机构
[1] Charite, Dept Urol, Hindenburgdamm 30, D-12203 Berlin, Germany
[2] Charite, Dept Radiol, Hindenburgdamm 30, D-12203 Berlin, Germany
关键词
PI-RADS; Prostate biopsy; Targeted biopsy; Real-time MRI/ultrasound fusion biopsy; Prostate cancer/diagnosis; MULTIPARAMETRIC MAGNETIC-RESONANCE; GUIDED BIOPSY; TARGETED BIOPSY; IDENTIFICATION; GUIDELINES; DIAGNOSIS; PROTOCOL; 12-CORE; ANTIGEN; MRI;
D O I
10.1007/s00345-015-1671-8
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
To evaluate the performance of real-time MRI/ultrasound (MRI/US) fusion-guided targeted biopsy (TB) in men with primary and repeat biopsies and correlate the prostate cancer detection rate (CDR) with the PI-RADS score. Analysis included 408 consecutive men with primary and prior negative biopsies who underwent TB and 10-core random biopsy (RB) between January 2012 and January 2015. TB was performed with a real-time MRI/US fusion platform with sensor-based registration. Clinically significant PCa was defined as Gleason score (GS) a parts per thousand yen7 or GS 6 with maximal cancer core length a parts per thousand yen4 mm for TB and according to Epstein criteria for RB. The overall CDR was 56 % (227/408). The CDR for primary biopsy was 74 % (60/81) and 57 % (67/117), 49 % (62/126), 45 % (38/84) for patients with 1, 2 and a parts per thousand yen3 prior negative biopsies. CDRs correlated with PI-RADS 2/3/4/5 were 16 % (5/32), 26 % (29/113), 62 % (94/152) and 89 % (99/111), respectively. The rates of significant tumors in relation to PI-RADS 2/3/4/5 were 60 % (3/5), 66 % (19/29), 74 % (70/94), 95 % (94/99). In 139 (61 %) cases with radical prostatectomy (RP), the rates of a parts per thousand yenpT3 tumors in correlation with PI-RADS 4 and 5 were 20 % (11/56) and 49 % (32/65). PI-RADS constituted the strongest predictor of significant PCa detection (p < 0.007). Real-time MRI/US fusion-guided TB combined with RB improved PCa detection in patients with primary and repeat biopsies. The CDR was strongly correlated with a rising PI-RADS score, values of 4 and 5 increasing the detection of clinically significant tumors and leading to a higher histological stage after RP.
引用
收藏
页码:525 / 532
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] EVALUATION OF PROSTATE IMAGING REPORTING AND DATA SYSTEM (PI-RADS) VERSION 2 FOR PROSTATE CANCER DETECTION: A RETROSPECTIVE SINGLE-CENTER STUDY
    Grbanovic, Lora
    Kovacevic, Lucija
    Kulis, Tomislav
    Kastelan, Zeljko
    Kralik, Marko
    Ivandic, Stjepan
    Prutki, Maja
    ACTA CLINICA CROATICA, 2024, 63 : 14 - 21
  • [32] Prostate Cancer Localization Using Multiparametric MR Imaging: Comparison of Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) and Likert Scales
    Rosenkrantz, Andrew B.
    Kim, Sooah
    Lim, Ruth P.
    Hindman, Nicole
    Deng, Fang-Ming
    Babb, James S.
    Taneja, Samir S.
    RADIOLOGY, 2013, 269 (02) : 481 - 491
  • [33] COMBINATION OF VERSION 2.0 PROSTATE IMAGING REPORTING AND DATA SYSTEM (PI-RADS) AND PERIPROSTATIC FAT THICKNESS ON MULTIPARAMETRIC MRI TO PREDICT THE PRESENCE OF PROSTATE CANCER
    Cao, Yudong
    Cao, Min
    Chen, Yuke
    Yu, Wei
    Wang, Xiaoying
    Jin, Jie
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2017, 197 (04): : E819 - E819
  • [34] The Impact of Prostate Volume on the Prostate Imaging and Reporting Data System (PI-RADS) in a Real-World Setting
    Volz, Yannic
    Apfelbeck, Maria
    Pyrgidis, Nikolaos
    Pfitzinger, Paulo L.
    Berg, Elena
    Ebner, Benedikt
    Enzinger, Benazir
    Ivanova, Troya
    Atzler, Michael
    Kazmierczak, Philipp M.
    Clevert, Dirk-Andre
    Stief, Christian
    Chaloupka, Michael
    DIAGNOSTICS, 2023, 13 (16)
  • [35] Can you trust the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) in special cases?
    Valentin, Birte
    Blondin, Dirk
    Ullrich, Tim
    Arsov, Christian
    Ackermann, Maximilian
    Antoch, Gerald
    Schimmoeller, Lars
    ROFO-FORTSCHRITTE AUF DEM GEBIET DER RONTGENSTRAHLEN UND DER BILDGEBENDEN VERFAHREN, 2020, 192 (06): : 580 - 583
  • [36] ANALYSIS ON THE EVIDENCE OF ULTRASOUND-MRI FUSION TARGET BIOPSY ON PI-RADS SCORE 3 PROSTATE LESIONS
    Kim, Kyung Hwan
    Baek, Seung Ryong
    Park, Jih Hoon
    Kang, Byeong Jin
    Park, Si Kyun
    Park, Won Young
    Hong, Seung Baek
    Kim, Suk
    Ku, Ja Yoon
    Ha, Hong Koo
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2019, 201 (04): : E178 - E178
  • [37] Perspectives on technology: Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) interobserver variability
    Taya, Michio
    Behr, Spencer C.
    Westphalen, Antonio C.
    BJU INTERNATIONAL, 2024, 134 (04) : 510 - 518
  • [38] Clinical utility of PSA density and PI-RADS for deferring biopsy for the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer
    Truong, Matthew
    Stevens, Erica
    Ward, Ryan
    Bullen, Jennifer
    Austhof, Ethan
    Valdez, Rogelio
    Purysko, Andrei
    Klein, Eric A.
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2020, 38 (06)
  • [39] Interobserver agreement of Prostate Imaging–Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS–v2)
    Hala Maher Ahmed
    Ahmed Ebrahim Ebeed
    Ahmed Hamdy
    Mohamed Abou El-Ghar
    Ahmed Abdel Khalek Abdel Razek
    Egyptian Journal of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, 52
  • [40] Impact of changing PI-RADS cutoff on prostate cancer detection by MRI cognitive fusion biopsy in biopsy-naïve patients
    Hesham Abdel-Azim El-Helaly
    Asem Abdel-Aziz Mahmoud
    Ahmed Mohamed Magdy
    Abdelwahab Hasehem
    Hamdy Mohamed Ibrahim
    Khaled Moheyelden Mohamed
    Mohamed Hamdy Ismail
    Journal of the Egyptian National Cancer Institute, 35