Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37340208›Full record

ArticleInternational urology and nephrology2023

Comparing 12-core and 20-core biopsy for prostate cancer diagnosis with transperineal MR/US fusion biopsy: assessing the effective number of systemic cores using propensity score matching.

Hyeok Jae Kwon, Seung Ah Rhew, Chang Eil Yoon, Dongho Shin, Seokhwan Bang, Yong Hyun Park, Hyuk Jin Cho, U-Syn Ha, Sung-Hoo Hong, Ji Youl Lee and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International urology and nephrology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
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

12 authors.

Hyeok Jae KwonDepartment of Urology, College of Medicine, Seoul St. Mary's Hospital, The Catholic University of Korea, 222, Banpo-daero, Seocho-gu, Seoul, 06591, Republic of Korea.
Seung Ah RhewDepartment of Urology, College of Medicine, Seoul St. Mary's Hospital, The Catholic University of Korea, 222, Banpo-daero, Seocho-gu, Seoul, 06591, Republic of Korea.
Chang Eil YoonDepartment of Urology, College of Medicine, Seoul St. Mary's Hospital, The Catholic University of Korea, 222, Banpo-daero, Seocho-gu, Seoul, 06591, Republic of Korea.
Dongho ShinDepartment of Urology, College of Medicine, Seoul St. Mary's Hospital, The Catholic University of Korea, 222, Banpo-daero, Seocho-gu, Seoul, 06591, Republic of Korea.
Seokhwan BangDepartment of Urology, College of Medicine, Seoul St. Mary's Hospital, The Catholic University of Korea, 222, Banpo-daero, Seocho-gu, Seoul, 06591, Republic of Korea.
Yong Hyun ParkDepartment of Urology, College of Medicine, Seoul St. Mary's Hospital, The Catholic University of Korea, 222, Banpo-daero, Seocho-gu, Seoul, 06591, Republic of Korea.
Hyuk Jin ChoDepartment of Urology, College of Medicine, Seoul St. Mary's Hospital, The Catholic University of Korea, 222, Banpo-daero, Seocho-gu, Seoul, 06591, Republic of Korea.
U-Syn HaDepartment of Urology, College of Medicine, Seoul St. Mary's Hospital, The Catholic University of Korea, 222, Banpo-daero, Seocho-gu, Seoul, 06591, Republic of Korea.
Sung-Hoo HongDepartment of Urology, College of Medicine, Seoul St. Mary's Hospital, The Catholic University of Korea, 222, Banpo-daero, Seocho-gu, Seoul, 06591, Republic of Korea.
Ji Youl LeeDepartment of Urology, College of Medicine, Seoul St. Mary's Hospital, The Catholic University of Korea, 222, Banpo-daero, Seocho-gu, Seoul, 06591, Republic of Korea.
Sae Woong KimDepartment of Urology, College of Medicine, Seoul St. Mary's Hospital, The Catholic University of Korea, 222, Banpo-daero, Seocho-gu, Seoul, 06591, Republic of Korea.
Hyong Woo MoonDepartment of Urology, College of Medicine, Seoul St. Mary's Hospital, The Catholic University of Korea, 222, Banpo-daero, Seocho-gu, Seoul, 06591, Republic of Korea. aspasias@hanmail.net.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9352-3411

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeFor transperineal (TP) prostate biopsy, target biopsy for visible lesions on MRI is important, but there is no consensus of the number of systemic biopsy cores. Our study aimed to confirm the diagnostic efficiency of 20-core systemic biopsy by comparison with 12-core using propensity score matching (PSM).

methodsThe 494 patients conducted the naive TP biopsy were retrospectively analyzed. There were 293 patients with 12-core biopsy and 201 patients with 20-core biopsy. PSM was performed for minimizing confounding variables, and the established effects' value was analyzed for 'index-positive or negative' clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) (Index means PIRADS Score ≥ 3 on multiparametric prostate MRI).

resultsAt 12-core biopsy, there were 126 cases of prostate cancer (43.0%), and 97 cases of csPCa (33.1%). At 20-core biopsy, there were 91 cases (45.3%) and 63 cases (31.3%). After propensity score matching, for index-negative csPCa, the estimated odds ratio was 4.03 (95% CI 1.35-12.09, p value 0.0128), and for index-positive csPCa, the estimated odds ratio was 0.98 (95% CI 0.63-1.52, p value 0.9308).

conclusionsThe 20-core biopsy did not show a higher detection rate for csPCa in comparison with the 12-core biopsy. However, when MRI did not show a suspicious lesion, 20-core biopsy showed higher odd ratio in comparison with 12-core biopsy. Therefore, if there is a suspicious lesion in MRI, 20-core biopsy is excessive and 12-core biopsy is sufficient. Whereas if there is no suspicious lesion in MRI, it is better to proceed with 20-core biopsy.

Indexed as

ProstateProstatic NeoplasmsHumansImage-Guided BiopsyMagnetic Resonance ImagingMalePropensity ScoreRetrospective StudiesImage-guided biopsyMagnetic resonance imagingPropensity scoreProstate cancer

Identifiers

PMID37340208
PMCPMC10499967

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.