ArticleTranslational andrology and urology2019
Impact of a novel ultrasound microvascular imaging and elastography on prostate cancer classification.
Article in Translational andrology and urology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Development of ultrasonography for the detection of prostate cancer.Journal of medical ultrasonics (2001) · 2026Review
- The Role of Monochromatic Superb Microvascular Index to Predict Malignancy of Solid Focal Lesions: Correlation Between Vascular Index and Histological Bioptic Findings.Tomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.) · 2025Article
- New microvascular ultrasound techniques: abdominal applications.La Radiologia medica · 2023Review
- Review
- Modified Predictive Model and Nomogram by Incorporating Prebiopsy Biparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging With Clinical Indicators for Prostate Biopsy Decision Making.Frontiers in oncology · 2021Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study was aimed to compare the sensitivity of transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) guided systematic biopsy (TRUS-SB), superb microvascular imaging guided targeted biopsy (SMI-TB), and elastography ultrasound guided targeted biopsy (EU-TB) in detecting prostate cancer (PCa).
methodsOne hundred and eighty-four patients with suspicious PCa were randomly divided into two groups, SMI-TB group (n=92) and EU-TB group (n=92). All the patients received a 2-core SMI-TB or a 2-core EU-TB before receiving a 12-core TRU-SB depending on the group. The 2-core SMI-TB was conducted at the most increased vascularity areas rated by a radiologist on a semi-quantitative criterion. The 2-core EU-TB was performed at the dark blue areas that identified as suspicious areas. The PCa detection rate was compared among TRUS-SB, SMI-TB, and EU-TB in the total population and in two groups.
resultsPCa was detected in 65 out of 184 patients. The SMI-TB group patients received 1,272 cores in total with a positive rate of 23.81% (40/168) for SMI-TB cores and 4.17% (46/1,104) for TRUS-SB cores. The EU-TB group patients received a total of 1,262 cores with a positive rate of 31.01% (49/158) for EU-TB cores and 5.34% (59/1,104) for TRUS-SB cores. Targeted cores (27.30%, 89/326) achieved significantly higher sensitivity in PCa detection than systematic cores (4.76%, 105/2,208) (SMI-TB
conclusionsSuperb microvascular imaging and elastography ultrasound guided targeted biopsy may result in higher prostate cancer detection rate as adjunct to gray-scale ultrasound guided systematic biopsy. However, targeted biopsy alone is not sufficient to detect PCa, compared with systematic biopsy.
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.