Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36941382›Full record

ReviewUrologie (Heidelberg, Germany)2023

[Systematic or targeted fusion-guided biopsy].

Analena Elisa Handke, Peter Albers, Lars Schimmöller, David Bonekamp, Patrick Asbach, Heinz-Peter Schlemmer, Boris A Hadaschik, Jan Philipp Radtke

Abstract readEnglish AbstractReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Urologie (Heidelberg, Germany), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Superiority ofAnnals of nuclear medicine · 2025
    Article
  3. Review
  4. A hospital-based study of prostate biopsy results in Indian males.Journal of family medicine and primary care · 2024
    Article
  5. [Current state of prostate biopsy].Urologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2023
    Article
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

8 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Analena Elisa HandkeUrologische Klinik, Universitätsklinikum Essen, Essen, Deutschland.
Peter AlbersKlinik für Urologie, Medizinische Fakultät, Heinrich-Heine-Universität Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Deutschland.
Lars SchimmöllerMedizinische Fakultät, Institut für Diagnostische und Interventionelle Radiologie, Heinrich-Heine-Universität Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Deutschland.
David BonekampAbteilung Radiologie, Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum (dkfz), Heidelberg, Deutschland.
Patrick AsbachKlinik für Radiologie, Charité Campus Benjamin Franklin, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Deutschland.
Heinz-Peter SchlemmerAbteilung Radiologie, Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum (dkfz), Heidelberg, Deutschland.
Boris A HadaschikUrologische Klinik, Universitätsklinikum Essen, Essen, Deutschland.
Jan Philipp RadtkeKlinik für Urologie, Medizinische Fakultät, Heinrich-Heine-Universität Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Deutschland. janphilipp.radtke@med.uni-duesseldorf.de.
German Cancer Research Center · DEKlinik und Poliklinik für Urologie · DEFranklin University · USHeinrich Heine University Düsseldorf · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEarly detection of prostate cancer (PCa) is associated with a high risk for detecting low-risk disease. In the primary biopsy indication, systematic biopsy leads to an increased detection of clinically insignificant PCa, and significant prostate cancers are not detected with sufficient sensitivity, especially without prior magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Similar data have recently become available for PCa screening.

objectivesIn light of the current literature, this article aims to discuss the data on systematic and combined targeted and systematic multiparametric MRI (mpMRI)-guided fusion biopsy to improve PCa diagnosis in clinically suspected cancer even in screening using multivariable risk stratification. MATERIALS AND

methodsLiterature review on mpMRI and MRI/TRUS fusion biopsy (TRUS: transrectal ultrasonography) for tumor detection in suspected prostate cancer and PCa screening was performed.

resultsMultiparametric MRI as a reflex test after prostate-specific antigen (PSA) determination (PSA cut-off 4 ng/ml) in combination with targeted biopsy alone reduces the detection of clinically nonsignificant tumors in early detection by half. On the other hand, in the form of a target saturation or in combination with a systematic biopsy, the sensitivity for the detection of cancers of International Society of Urogenital Pathology (ISUP) grade groups 2 or higher can be improved. Similar results are also shown in PCa screening with a PSA cut-off of 3 ng/ml.

conclusionsThe evidence for performing a targeted fusion biopsy alone is currently insufficient. Therefore, the combination of mpMRI-guided targeted and systematic biopsy continues to be the recommended standard for prostate cancer diagnosis.

Indexed as

Prostate-Specific AntigenProstatic NeoplasmsHumansImage-Guided BiopsyMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleProstateProstate-Specific AntigenMultiparametric MRIOverdiagnosisProstate cancerProstate-specific antigenRisk stratification

Identifiers

PMID36941382
OpenAlexW4327936203

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.