Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39232094›Full record

ReviewProstate cancer and prostatic diseases2025

Biopsy strategies in the era of mpMRI: a comprehensive review.

Olivier Windisch, Massimo Valerio, Chi-Hang Yee, Paolo Gontero, Baris Bakir, Christof Kastner, Hashim U Ahmed, Cosimo De Nunzio, Jean de la Rosette

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing 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

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Evaluating [Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2024
    Article
  15. 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

9 authors.

Olivier WindischDivision of Urology, Geneva University Hospitals, Geneva, Switzerland. o.windisch@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8963-5445
Massimo ValerioDivision of Urology, Geneva University Hospitals, Geneva, Switzerland.
Chi-Hang YeeSH Ho Urology Centre, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Pok Fu Lam, Hong Kong.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6557-3107
Paolo GonteroDivision of Urology, Department of Surgical Sciences, San Giovanni Battista Hospital, University of Studies of Torino, Torino, Italy.
Baris BakirDepartment of Radiology, Istanbul University, Istanbul Medical School, Istanbul, Turkey.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6587-9787
Christof KastnerDepartment of Urology, Cambridge University Hospitals and University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Hashim U AhmedImperial Prostate, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1674-6723
Cosimo De NunzioDepartment of Urology, University Sapienza, Rome, Italy.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2190-512X
Jean de la RosetteIstanbul Medipol University, Istanbul, Türkiye.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6308-1763

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSince its initial description the prostate biopsy technique for detection of prostate cancer (PCA) has constantly evolved. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) has been proven to have a sensitivity exceeding 90% to detect the index lesion. This narrative review discusses the evidence around several biopsy strategies, especially in the context of patients that might be eligible for focal therapy.

methodA non-systematic literature research was performed on February 15th 2024 using the Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (Medline), Web of Science and Google Scholar.

resultsThe transrectal (TR) route is associated with an increased postoperative sepsis rate, even with adequate antibiotic prophylaxis. The transperineal (TP) route is now recommended by international guidelines, firstly for its decreased rate of urosepsis. Recent evidence shows a non-inferiority of TP compared to TR route, and even a higher detection rate of clinically significant PCA (csPCA) in the anterior and apical region, that are usually difficult to target using the TR route. Several targeting techniques (cognitive, software-fusion or in-bore) enhance our ability to provide an accurate risk assessment of prostate cancer aggressiveness and burden, while reducing the number of cores and reducing the number of clinically insignificant prostate cancer (ciPCA). While MRI-TB have proven their role, the role of systematic biopsies (SB) is still important because it detects 5-16% of csPCA that would have been missed by MRI-TB alone. The strategies of SB depend mainly on the route used (TR vs. TP) and the number of cores to be collected (10-12 cores vs. saturation biopsies vs. trans-perineal template mapping-biopsies or Ginsburg Protocol vs. regional biopsies).

conclusionSeveral biopsy strategies have been described and should be known when assessing patients for focal therapy. Because MRI systematically under evaluates the lesion size, systematic biopsies, and especially perilesional biopsies, can help to increase sensitivity at the cost of an increased number of cores.

Indexed as

Image-Guided BiopsyMultiparametric Magnetic Resonance ImagingProstateProstatic NeoplasmsHumansMale

Identifiers

PMID39232094
PMCPMC12106066

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.