ArticleInternational urology and nephrology2026
Transgluteal MRI in-bore prostate biopsy in routine clinical practice: a contemporary-cohort-study from a german tertiary center.
Article in International urology and nephrology, 2026. 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.
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
20 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo assess the diagnostic performance, predictors, and clinical utility of MRI-guided prostate biopsy over an 18 year period in a real-world tertiary care setting. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed patients who underwent MRI-guided prostate biopsy between 2006 and 2024 at a German tertiary care center. Clinical data, PI-RADS, PSA levels, prostate volume, and biopsy outcomes were evaluated. Logistic regression models assessed associations between clinical variables and cancer detection, clinical significance (ISUP ≥ 3), and upgrading after radical prostatectomy (RPE).
resultsAmong 496 patients (mean age 66 ± 8 years; PSA, median (IQR): 7.2 ng/ml (5-10)), cancer was detected in 33% (162/496), with 29% (47/162) classified as clinically significant. In our biopsy cohort (PI-RADS 3: 12.7%, PI-RADS 4: 43.0%, PI-RADS 5: 5.6%), clinically significant prostate cancer (ISUP ≥ 3) was detected in 3.2% of PI-RADS 3, 12.2% of PI-RADS 4, and 28.6% of PI-RADS 5 lesions. PI-RADS 5 lesions were strongly associated with cancer detection (OR 3.6, 95% CI 1.35-10.13) and significant disease (OR 7.1, 95% CI 1.38-55.15), independent of age, prostate volume, and biopsy extent. While these covariates predicted overall biopsy positivity (p < 0.02), they were not associated with significant cancer (p > 0.05) or upgrading at RPE (p > 0.05). Among 29 RPE patients, only one was upgraded. Post-biopsy CT was performed in all patients: MRI-guided biopsy was associated with a low complication rate: minor localized bleeding occurred in 4.4% of cases, and no major adverse events were observed.
conclusionsMRI-guided prostate biopsy showed high diagnostic accuracy and safety in routine care. PI-RADS was the key predictor of clinically significant cancer. The low rate of upgrading after RPE supports its reliability in guiding patient management and avoiding overtreatment. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: MRI-guided prostate biopsy enables accurate detection of clinically significant prostate cancer with low risk of understaging, supporting its routine use in personalized urologic oncology.
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.