216
Views
18
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Original Article

The combination of targeted and systematic prostate biopsies is the best protocol for the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer

ORCID Icon, , , , , , , , , , , , & show all
Pages 174-179 | Received 08 Aug 2017, Accepted 27 Jan 2018, Published online: 20 Feb 2018
 

Abstract

Objective: Compared with standard systematic transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided biopsies (SBx), targeted biopsies (TBx) using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)/TRUS fusion could increase the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer (PCa-s) and reduce non-significant PCa (PCa-ns). This study aimed to compare the performance of the two approaches.

Materials and methods: A prospective, single-center study was conducted on all consecutive patients with PCa suspicion who underwent prebiopsy multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) using the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS). All patients underwent mpMRI/TRUS fusion TBx (two to four cores/target) using UroStation™ (Koelis, Grenoble, France) and SBx (10–12 cores) during the same session. PCa-s was defined as a maximal positive core length ≥4 mm or Gleason score ≥7.

Results: The study included 191 patients (at least one suspicious lesion: PI-RADS ≥3). PCa was detected in 55.5% (106/191) of the cases. The overall PCa detection rate and the PCa-s detection rate were not significantly higher in TBx alone versus SBx (44.5% vs 46.1%, p = .7, and 38.2% vs 33.5%, p = .2, respectively). Combined TBx and SBx diagnosed significantly more PCa-s than SBx alone (45% vs 33.5%, p = .02). PCa-s was detected only by TBx in 12% of cases (23/191) and only by SBx in 7.3% (14/191). Gleason score was upgraded by TBx in 16.8% (32/191) and by SBx in 13.6% (26/191) of patients (p = .4).

Conclusions: The combination of TBx and SBx achieved the best results for the detection and prognosis of PCa-s. The use of SBx alone would have missed the detection of PCa-s in 12% of patients.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Disclosure statement

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.