ArticleUltrasonography (Seoul, Korea)2019
Comparison of the diagnostic yield of various systematic randomized prostate biopsy protocols using prostate phantoms made of devil's tongue jelly.
Article in Ultrasonography (Seoul, Korea), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe purpose of this study was to compare the diagnostic yield of five systematic randomized protocols using 12-20 biopsy cores with variably-sized phantoms.
methodsA total of 100 prostate phantom models were produced by casting liquid devil's tongue jelly using silicone molds. Sets of 20 phantoms were created with the following volumes: 20 mL, 40 mL, 60 mL, 80 mL, and 100 mL. Three focal lesions were created by injecting 0.5 mL of warm agar solution stained with red, blue, and green ink into each phantom model. The focal lesions were verified by ultrasonography. The systematic randomized biopsy protocols consisted of 12, 14, 16, 18, and 20 biopsy cores. The diagnostic yield of the multiple systematic biopsy protocols was compared.
resultsThe overall detection rates of each model set were 93.3% for 20 mL, 88.3% for 40 mL, 71.7% for 60 mL, 43.3% for 80 mL, and 30.0% for 100 mL. Statistically significant differences in the detection rate were found between 40 mL and 60 mL and between 60 mL and 80 mL. No statistically significant increase in the detection rate was observed within a given volume set even when the number of core biopsies increased from 12 to 20.
conclusionThe diagnostic yield of systematic randomized biopsies is inversely proportional to the phantom volume.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.