Introduction Although several new measurements for female sexual dysfunction (FSD) have recently been developed, the Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI) remains the gold standard for screening and one of the most widely used questionnaires. The Italian translation of the FSFI has been used in several studies conducted in Italy, but a linguistic validation of the Italian version does not exist. Aim The aim of this study was to perform a linguistic validation of the Italian version of the FSFI. Methods A multicenter cross-sectional study conducted in 14 urological and gynecological clinics, uniformly distributed over Italian territory. We performed all steps necessary to determine the reliability and the test–retest reliability of the Italian version of the FSFI. The study population was a convenience sample of 409 Italian women. Main Outcome Measures The reliability of the questionnaire was calculated using Cronbach's alpha, which was considered weak, moderate, or high if its value was found less than 0.6, between 0.6 and 0.8, or equal to or greater than 0.8, respectively. The test–retest reliability was assessed for all women in the sample by calculating Pearson's concordance correlation coefficient for each domain and for the total score, both at baseline and after 15 days (r range between −1.00 to +1.00, where +1.00 indicates the strongest positive association). Results Cronbach's alpha coefficents for total and domain score were sufficiently high, ranging from 0.92 to 0.97 for the total sample. The test–retest procedure revealed that the concordance correlation coefficient was very high both for FSFI-I total score (Pearson's P = 0.93) and for each domain (Pearson's P always >0.92). Conclusion For the first time in the literature, our study has produced a validated and reliable Italian version of the FSFI questionnaire. Consequently, the Italian FSFI can be used as a reliable tool for preliminary screening for female sexual dysfunction for Italian women.

Objective: Targeted fusion biopsies have led to an improved prostate cancer (PCa) detection rate (CDR). Our aim was to assess if device-assisted fusion biopsies are superior to cognitive ones in terms of CDR. The association between multiparametric MRI parameters and PCa was also evaluated. Methods: We retrospectively enrolled 50 patients who underwent transrectal biopsy with elastic fusion (Koelis; group KB, n = 25) or cognitive approach (group CB, n = 25). Targeted biopsies were done on targets, while a variable number of random biopsies were performed depending on the clinical case. Results: The groups did not significantly differ in terms of age, prostate-specific antigen, prostate volume and previous biopsies. Mean number of random cores was significantly inferior in KB group (8.4 vs. 12.1) and mean number of targeted biopsies was significantly higher (3.6 vs. 2.6). CDR was higher in fusion biopsies (64 vs. 40%), with the gap becoming significant when considering CDR of MRI targets only (59 vs. 27%). The difference was marked for lesions ≤10 mm, where CDR was 52% in KB against 21% in CB group. Conclusions: According to our study, elastic fusion biopsies performed with Koelis achieve an increased per-patient and per-lesion CDR as compared to cognitive biopsies, especially in the case of lesions ≤10 mm.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract