ArticleProstate international2023
How many cores should be taken from each region of interest when performing a targeted transrectal prostate biopsy?
Article in Prostate international, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- [Reducing overdiagnosis-how to do I correctly assess the indication for prostate biopsy?]Urologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2026Review
- The addition of peri-operative gentamicin with ciprofloxacin reduces infection and sepsis rates post transrectal prostate biopsy.Prostate international · 2025Article
- Advanced Imaging for Localized Prostate Cancer.Cancers · 2024Review
- Negative magnetic resonance imaging cannot be used to omit an initial prostate biopsy - An ambispective study.Prostate international · 2024Article
- Article
- Detection of anterior prostate cancer using a magnetic resonance imaging-transrectal ultrasound fusion biopsy in cases with initial biopsy and history of systematic biopsies.Prostate international · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The number of core biopsies required per region of interest (ROI) is controversial, as is the localization of the core to be taken from a lesion. This study aimed to determine the ideal biopsy core number and location in a multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging guided targeted prostate biopsy (TPB), without reducing the clinically significant prostate cancer (csPC) detection rate. Materials and methods: Data of patients who had PI-RADS ≥3 lesions on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and underwent a TPB in our clinic between October 2020 and January 2022 were reviewed, retrospectively. The first and second cores were taken from the central part of the ROI, whereas the third and fourth cores were taken from the right and left peripheries of the ROI. We compared the csPC detection success of single-, 2-, 3-, and 4-core samplings. Results: Software-based transrectal TPB was performed on 251 ROIs in a total of 167 patients. Internal Society of Urological Pathology Grade Group ≥2 cancer was detected in at least one core in 64 (25.4%) lesions. Moreover, csPC was detected in 42 (65.6%) ROIs in first-core biopsies; in 59 (92.2%) ROIs in first- and second-core biopsies; in 62 (96.9%) ROIs in first-, second-, and third-core biopsies; and in 64 (100%) ROIs in first-, second-, third-, and fourth-core biopsies. Using McNemar's test for comparison, a significant difference was found in terms of csPC detection success between performing first-core and second-core biopsies (65.6 - 92.2%, Conclusion: We concluded that taking 2-core biopsies from the center of each ROIs during a transrectal TPB is sufficient for diagnosing csPC.
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.