Does 1.5 T mpMRI play a definite role in detection of clinically significant prostate cancer? Findings from a prospective study comparing blind 24-core saturation and targeted biopsies with a novel data remodeling model

Moro, Fabrizio; Zecchini, G.; Morlacco, Alessandro; Gardiman, Marina Paola; Lacognata, Carmelo; Lauro, Alberto; Galetti, T. Prayer; Zattoni, Filiberto

doi:10.1007/s40520-018-0939-4

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In 70.4% of all patients (343/487) where there was at least one lesion of PI-RADS ≥3, using 24 core SB as the reference, MRI-TB had a negative predictive value of 92% and 99% for csPC defined as GG ≥2 or GG ≥3, respectively [35]. These results have been confirmed by several studies [36][37][38][39][40], ans a summary can be found in Table 3. Many clinical societies have since included a recom-mendation for performing mpMRI after an initial negative SB and persistent suspicion for PC [14].…”

Section: Patients With Negative Systematic Biopsy and Persistent Suspmentioning

confidence: 52%

Role of Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Predicting Pathologic Outcomes in Prostate Cancer

Harland

Stenzl

Todenhöfer

2021

World J Mens Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

For a long time, the urological community has been on a quest to find the best means for early detection of prostate cancer (PC). An important milestone was the introduction of prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-testing. While initial results regarding a structured screening were controversial, with longer follow-up of the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) trial [1] and more detailed assessment of the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian Cancer Screening (PLCO) trial [2,3] the advantage is increasingly evident, with the number needed to screen dropping below the levels of the widely accepted breast cancer screening [4]. A variety of markers have since been introduced with improved "sensitivity" and specificity, but low availability and high cost have prevented their wide

show abstract

Section: Patients With Negative Systematic Biopsy and Persistent Suspmentioning

confidence: 52%

Role of Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Predicting Pathologic Outcomes in Prostate Cancer

Harland

Stenzl

Todenhöfer

2021

World J Mens Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In summary, on a patient basis, the primary mpMRI has a negative predictive value (NPV) of 88% for PC and Gleason score of ≥3 + 4 [ 7 ]. This can be improved in cases with previous negative systematic biopsy to an NPV of 91–100% [ 11 , 12 , 13 ]. The capabilities come with some important limitations.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Micro-Ultrasound: a way to bring imaging for prostate cancer back to urology

Harland

Stenzl

2021

Prostate International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Only a decade ago, there were insufficient imaging options for the detection and local staging of prostate cancer. However, the introduction of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) has advanced a much-needed tool for this scope of application. The possibilities and limitations of mpMRI have been well studied. Imaging must be acquired and evaluated using a standardized protocol (the latest version of Prostate Imaging–Reporting and Data System). Sensitivity has been shown to increase with higher grades and larger tumors, and while the detection rate on a per patient basis is relatively high, the per-lesion detection rate is far inferior. Various specialists have attempted to elevate the use of transrectal ultrasound, a tool frequently used by all urologists. Encouragement for this idea comes from a recently introduced system of high frequency transrectal ultrasound. The level of evidence supporting its use in the detection and staging of prostate cancer is not comparable with mpMRI yet, but initial prospective studies indicate good potential. The sensitivity of micro-ultrasound and mpMRI for clinically significant prostate cancer ranges from 94% to 100% and from 88% to 90%, respectively. Further areas of application, such as local staging for prostate and bladder cancer, are currently being evaluated. In summary, microultrasound presents a promising technology for further improving urological imaging and allows for the possibility of returning prostate cancer imaging to urologists. This review will summarize the current scientific basis for the use of micro-ultrasound in the detection of prostate cancer.

show abstract

Prostate MRI, with or without MRI-targeted biopsy, and systematic biopsy for detecting prostate cancer

Drost

Osses

Nieboer

et al. 2019

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

382

422

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Does 1.5 T mpMRI play a definite role in detection of clinically significant prostate cancer? Findings from a prospective study comparing blind 24-core saturation and targeted biopsies with a novel data remodeling model

Abstract: In patients with suspected PC and a previous negative PBx, a normal mpMRI may exclude a clinically significant PC, avoiding sPBx.

Cited by 3 publications

References 25 publications

Role of Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Predicting Pathologic Outcomes in Prostate Cancer

Role of Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Predicting Pathologic Outcomes in Prostate Cancer

Micro-Ultrasound: a way to bring imaging for prostate cancer back to urology

Prostate MRI, with or without MRI-targeted biopsy, and systematic biopsy for detecting prostate cancer

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About