ArticleFrontiers in oncology2022
Three-dimensional ultrasound integrating nomogram and the blood flow image for prostate cancer diagnosis and biopsy: A retrospective study.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Backgrounds: Prostate cancer (PCa) is the second most common male cancer in the world and based on its high prevalence and overwhelming effect on patients, more precise diagnostic and therapeutic methods are essential research topics. As such, this study aims to evaluate the value of three-dimensional transrectal ultrasound (3D-TRUS) in the detection, diagnosis and biopsy of PCa, and to provide a basis for clinical practice of PCa. Methods: Retrospective analysis and comparison of a total of 401 male patients who underwent prostate TRUS in our hospital from 2019 to 2020 were conducted, with all patients having prostate biopsy. Nomogram was used to estimate the probability of different ultrasound signs in diagnosing prostate cancer. The ROC curve was used to estimate the screening and diagnosis rates of 3D-TRUS, MRI and TRUS for prostate cancer. Results: A total of 401 patients were randomly divided into two groups according to different methods of prostate ultrasonography, namely the TRUS group (251 patients) and the 3D-TRUS group (150 patients). Of these cases, 111 patients in 3D-TRUS group underwent MRI scan. The nomogram further determined the value of 3D-TRUS for prostate cancer. The ROC AUC of prostate cancer detected by TRUS, MRI and 3D-TRUS was 0.5580, 0.6216 and 0.6267 respectively. Biopsy complications were lower in 3D-TRUS group than TRUS group, which was statistically significant ( Conclusions: The accuracy of 3D-TRUS was higher in diagnosis and biopsy of prostate cancer. Meanwhile, the positive rate of biopsy could be improved under direct visualization of 3D-TRUS, and the complications could be decreased markedly. Therefore, 3D-TRUS was of high clinical value in diagnosis and biopsy of prostate cancer.
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.