ArticleMedicine2018
Diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance-guided prostate biopsy and template-guided transperineal saturation biopsy.
Article in Medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- MRI software and cognitive fusion biopsies in people with suspected prostate cancer: a systematic review, network meta-analysis and cost-effectiveness analysis.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2024Pooled it
- Construction of an integrated diagnostic-therapeutic model for prostate cancer using rapid multiplex immunohistochemistry.Diagnostic pathology · 2026Article
- Utility of multiple core biopsies during transperineal template-guided mapping biopsy for patients with large prostates and PI-RADS 1-2 on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging.Prostate international · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To compare the accuracy of magnetic resonance-guided prostate biopsy (MR-GPB) and template-guided transperineal prostate saturation biopsy (TTPSB).A total of 219 patients with elevated prostate-specific antigen, abnormal digital rectal examination or ultrasound findings were enrolled. All patients underwent multiparametric magnetic resonance image (mpMRI). Patients with a Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) score of 3 to 5 underwent MR-GPB using 2 to 5 biopsy cores and then immediately underwent an 11-region TTPSB. Patients with a PI-RADS score of 1 to 2 underwent TTPSB alone. We compared the detection rates for any cancer, clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCA), and the spatial distribution of missed csPCA lesions.Among the 219 cases, 66 (30.1%) had a PI-RADS score of 1 to 2 on mpMRI. The detection rate of TTPSB in these patients was 9.1% (6/66). In total, detection rates for any cancer and csPCA were 48.9% (107/219) and 42.9% (94/219), respectively. Detection rates for any cancer (TTPSB 87/219, 39.7%; MR-GPB76/219, 34.7%, P = .161) and csPCA (TTPSB 76/219, 34.7%; MR-GPB 72/219, 32.9%, P = .636) did not significantly differ between the 2 groups. The csPCA lesions missed by MR-GPB were most commonly located on the left (8.5%, 8/94) and right (9.6%, 9/94) sides of the urethra.MR-GPB can reduce the rate of unnecessary prostate biopsies by approximately 30% and exhibits an efficacy comparable to TTPSB for the detection of any cancer and csPCA. Nevertheless, approximately 1/4 of csPCAs were missed by MR-GPB and were most commonly located on both sides of the urethra.
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.