ArticleThe Prostate2026
Is Saturation Biopsy Still a Viable Alternative to Fusion Biopsy in the Era of Multiparametric MRI? A Comparative Analysis in Patients With Prior Negative Biopsy.
Article in The Prostate, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWe aimed to compare the diagnostic accuracy of transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided saturation biopsy (SB) and multiparametric MRI (mpMRI)-TRUS fusion-guided combined biopsy (CB) in patients with prior negative prostate biopsies.
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed data from 160 patients who underwent transrectal prostate biopsy between January 2014 and March 2021. All had at least one prior negative biopsy. 80 patients underwent SB with a 20-core TRUS-guided approach. The remaining 80 patients, with mpMRI-detected PIRADS ≥ 3 lesions, underwent CB including 12-core systematic plus 2-4 targeted cores per lesion. Prostate cancer and clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) detection rates, and clinical parameters were compared between groups.
resultsThe groups had no statistically significant differences in baseline characteristics. The PCa detection rate was 20% in the CB group and 16.3% in the SB group (p = 0.682). csPCa detection rates were also similar: 11.3% in the CB cohort and 7.5% in the SB cohort (p = 0.589). Notably, the CB subgroup with PI-RADS ≥ 4 lesions had a significantly higher csPCa detection rate (28.6%) than SB group (7.5%) (p = 0.016). Patients diagnosed with PCa had significantly lower free PSA and free/total PSA ratios (p < 0.05). Complication rates were low and similar in both groups.
conclusionsCB demonstrates the highest diagnostic yield for detecting csPCa, particularly in patients with PI-RADS ≥ 4 lesions. However, in resource-limited settings lacking mpMRI, systematic saturation biopsy remains a viable, safe, and effective alternative. PSA derivatives may serve as complementary tools to refine biopsy decisions.
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.