Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34876942›Full record

ArticlePolish journal of radiology2021

Evaluation of multiparametric prostate magnetic resonance imaging findings in patients with a Gleason score of 6 in transrectal ultrasonography-guided biopsy.

Emre Emekli, Elif Gündoğdu, Ata Özen

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Polish journal of radiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
0.1field-weighted citation impact, top 44% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Emre EmekliDepartment of Radiology, Faculty of Medicine, Eskişehir Osmangazi University, Eskişehir, Turkey.
Elif GündoğduDepartment of Radiology, Faculty of Medicine, Eskişehir Osmangazi University, Eskişehir, Turkey.
Ata ÖzenDepartment of Urology, Faculty of Medicine, Eskişehir Osmangazi University, Eskişehir, Turkey.
Eskişehir Osmangazi University · TR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeWe aimed to evaluate prostate multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) findings of patients with a Gleason score (GS) of 6 and effectiveness of MRI based on the final pathology result in patients undergoing radical prostatectomy (RP). MATERIAL AND

methodsmpMRI findings of 80 patients who had a GS of 3 + 3 and who underwent mpMRI were evaluated retrospectively. The mpMRI were scored according to the PIRADS v2.1 guidelines. The patients were divided into those with a high probability of clinically significant cancer (CSC) (PI-RADS 4-5) and those with a low probability of CSC (PI-RADS 2-3).

resultsOf the 80 patients, 33.8% had PI-RADS 2-3, and 66.2% had PI-RADS 4-5 lesions. There was a significant difference between the groups in prostate specific antigen (PSA) value, PSA density, patient age, and tumour percentage on biopsy. When the pathology results were taken as the gold standard in the group that underwent RP, sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of mpMRI were calculated as 94.74%, 100%, and 96.3%, respectively, an increase in the final GS was found in 9 (33.3%) of the 27 patients, and 70.35% of patients were identified as having CSC.

conclusionsPI-RADS 4-5 scores have high sensitivity and negative predictive value in the diagnosis of CSC. mpMRI is a reliable and non-invasive diagnostic method that can complement biopsy results in decision-making in patients who are initially evaluated as low risk.

Indexed as

Gleason scoremultiparametric magnetic resonance imagingprostate cancer

Identifiers

PMID34876942
PMCPMC8634417
OpenAlexW4206426426

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.