1. Diagnostic performance of MRI/TRUS fusion-guided biopsies vs. systematic prostate biopsies in biopsy-naïve, previous negative biopsy patients and men undergoing active surveillance
- Author
-
Michelangelo Fiorentino, Marco Borghesi, Marco Garofalo, Stefano Angelini, U. Barbaresi, Riccardo Schiavina, Beniamino Corcioni, Caterina Gaudiano, Carlo Casablanca, Francesco Chessa, Rita Golfieri, A. Ercolino, Valerio Vagnoni, Lorenzo Bianchi, Francesca Giunchi, Alessandro Bertaccini, Matteo Droghetti, Borghesi M., Bianchi L., Barbaresi U., Vagnoni V., Corcioni B., Gaudiano C., Fiorentino M., Giunchi F., Chessa F., Garofalo M., Bertaccini A., Angelini S., Ercolino A., Casablanca C., Droghetti M., Golfieri R., and Schiavina R.
- Subjects
Adult ,Image-Guided Biopsy ,Male ,medicine.medical_specialty ,Urology ,Biopsy ,Population ,Targeted biopsy ,Therapy naive ,Magnetic resonance imaging ,Prostate ,medicine ,80 and over ,Humans ,Prospective Studies ,Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging ,education ,Watchful Waiting ,Systematic biopsy ,Aged ,Aged, 80 and over ,education.field_of_study ,Index Lesion ,medicine.diagnostic_test ,business.industry ,Reproducibility of Results ,Middle Aged ,Prostate-Specific Antigen ,medicine.anatomical_structure ,Nephrology ,Radiology ,Prostatic neoplasms ,business ,Magnetic Resonance Imaging ,Prostatic Neoplasms - Abstract
BACKGROUND: We aimed to assess the detection rate of overall PCa and csPCa, and the clinical impact of MRI/TRUS fusion targeted biopsy (FUSION-TB) compared to TRUS guided systematic biopsy (SB) in patients with different biopsy settings. METHODS: Three hundred and five patients were submitted to FUSION-TB, divided into three groups: biopsy naïve patients, previous negative biopsies and patients under active surveillance (AS). All patients had a single suspicious index lesion at mpMRI. Within these groups, we enrolled men underwent both to FUSION-TB and SB in the same session. Overall detection rate of PCa and csPCa for the two biopsy methods were compared separately between the three groups of patients. RESULTS: No differences were observed between the three groups concerning clinical and radiological characteristics. We found no differences in terms of overall PCa detection (66% vs. 63.8%, P=0.617) and csPCa detection (56.4% vs. 51.1%; P=0.225) concerning biopsy naïve patients. In patients previously submitted to a negative biopsy, FUSION-TB showed higher detection rate of csPCa compared to SB alone (41,3% vs. 27% respectively, P=0.038). In patients under AS, no differences were observed between FUSION-TB and SB in terms of overall PCa (50% vs. 73.1%) and csPCa (30.8% vs. 26.9%, respectively; P=0.705) detection. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that in men with previously negative biopsy, FUSION-TB showed significantly higher diagnostic performance for clinically significant PCa as compared to SB. Combination of FUSION-TB and SB should be recommended in AS population to offer higher chance of csPCa diagnosis.
- Published
- 2021