ArticleDer Urologe. Ausg. A2016
[Value of MRI/ultrasound fusion in primary biopsy for the diagnosis of prostate cancer].
Article in Der Urologe. Ausg. A, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Accuracy of the magnetic resonance imaging pathway in the detection of prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases · 2019Pooled it
- [MRI/TRUS fusion-guided prostate biopsy : Value in the context of focal therapy].Der Urologe. Ausg. A · 2017Pooled it
- [Fusion biopsies for primary diagnosis of prostate cancer : Implementation, benefits, and clinical aspects].Der Urologe. Ausg. A · 2019Review
- The addition of a sagittal image fusion improves the prostate cancer detection in a sensor-based MRI /ultrasound fusion guided targeted biopsy.BMC urology · 2017Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMultiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) plays an emerging role in prostate cancer diagnosis. We compared the cancer detection rates of targeted biopsy (tB) of suspicious lesions in mpMRI versus systematic transperineal saturation biopsy (sB) in men with primary suspicion of prostate cancer (PCa).
methodsA total of 437 consecutive primary biopsy patients, who underwent transperineal systematic and fusion-guided biopsy between 2012 and 2014, were enrolled. mpMRI was evaluated based on PI-RADS. Analysis of biopsy specimen was performed following START criteria.
resultsOf the 437 men, 334 harbored 426 MR lesions. Overall, 274 PCa and 203 significant PCa (Gleason score (GS) ≥ 3 + 4, GS = 3 + 3 and PSA values ≥ 10 ng/ml) were detected. There were 52 (26 %) significant PCa exclusively found by sB, whereas only 18 (9 %) were identified by tB (p < 0.001). Of 80 high-grade PCa with GS ≥ 4 + 3, 70 were diagnosed by sB, and 60 by tB (p = 0.007). In addition, 54 % of all insignificant PCa (GS < 7, PSA < 10 ng/ml) were detected by sB alone (p < 0.001). AUC of mpMRI was 0.76-0.78.
conclusionThe combination of tB + sB detects PCa most accurately. Ongoing prospective (multicenter) studies are evaluating the status of the 12 core TRUS-guided random biopsy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26556268What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.