ArticleCurrent urology2020
"In-Bore" MRI-Guided Prostate Biopsy for Prostate Cancer Diagnosis: Results from 140 Consecutive Patients.
Article in Current urology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of MRI-guided in-bore and fusion biopsy for small PI-RADS 4 prostate lesions.World journal of urology · 2026Article
- An overview of utilizing artificial intelligence in localized prostate cancer imaging.Expert review of medical devices · 2025Review
- Prostate cancer detection with transrectal in-bore MRI biopsies: impact of prostate volume and lesion features.Insights into imaging · 2025Article
- Targeted biopsy of the prostate.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2025Review
- Advantageous Detection of Significant Prostate Cancer Using a Low-Field, Office-Based MRI System.Cureus · 2022Article
- Prostate Cancer Detection Rate of Manually Operated and Robot-assisted In-bore Magnetic Resonance Imaging Targeted Biopsy.European urology open science · 2022Article
- Ex Vivo Fluorescence Confocal Microscopy (FCM) of Prostate Biopsies Rethought: Opportunities of Intraoperative Examinations of MRI-Guided Targeted Biopsies in Routine Diagnostics.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Article
- Assessment of a novel smartglass-based point-of-care fusion approach for mixed reality-assisted targeted prostate biopsy: A pilot proof-of-concept study.Frontiers in surgery · 2022Article
- Erratum: "In-Bore" MRI-Guided Prostate Biopsy for Prostate Cancer Diagnosis: Results from 140 Consecutive Patients: Erratum.Current urology · 2021Article
- Diagnostic Yield of Incremental Biopsy Cores and Second Lesion Sampling for In-Gantry MRI-Guided Prostate Biopsy.AJR. American journal of roentgenology · 2021Article
- Recent Advances in Systematic and Targeted Prostate Biopsies.Research and reports in urology · 2021Review
- The combination of waterjet ablation (AquabeamCentral European journal of urology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTransrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy (TRUS-GB) is the current reference standard procedure for diagnosis of prostate cancer (PCa) but this procedure has limitations related to the low detection rate (DR) described in the literature. The aim of the study was to evaluate the DR efficiency, and complication rate in a pure "in-bore" magnetic resonance imaging-guided biopsy (MRI-GB) series according to the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System, version 2 (PI-RADS v2). MATERIALS AND
methodsFrom July 2015 to April 2018, a series of 142 consecutive patients undergoing MRI-GB were prospectively enrolled. According to the European Society of Urogenital Radiology guidelines, the presence of clinically significant PCa (csPCa) on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging was defined as equivocal, likely, or highly likely according to a PI-RADS v2, score of 3, 4, or 5, respectively.
resultsOf 142 patients, 76 (53.5%) were biopsy naive and 66 (46.5%) had ≤ 1 previous negative set of random TRUS-GB findings. The MRI-GB findings were positive in 75 of 142 patients with a DR of 52.8%. Of the 76 patients with ≤ 1 previous set of TRUS-GB, 43 had PCa found by MRI-GB, with a DR of 57.3%. The DR in the 66 biopsy-naive patients was 48% (32/66). Of the 75 patients with positive biopsy findings, 54 (80.5%) were found to have csPCa on histological examination. Of these 54 patients, 28 had an International Society of Urological Pathology grade 2; 5 had grade 3, 19 had grade 4, and 2 had grade 5. Considering the anatomic distribution of the index lesions using the PI-RADS v2 scheme, the probability of PCa was greater for lesions located in the peripheral zone (55 of 75, 73.3%) than for those in the central zone (20 of 75, 26.7%).
conclusionsOur study conducted on 142 patients confirmed the greater DR of csPCa by MRI-GB, with a very low number of cores needed and a negligible incidence of complications, especially in patients with a previous negative biopsy. MRI-GB is optimal for the diagnosis of anterior and central lesions.
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.