The role of multiparametric resonance and biopsy in prostate cancer detection: comparison with definitive histological report after laparoscopic/robotic radical prostatectomy

Rapisarda, S.; Bada, Maida; Crocetto, Felice; Barone, Biagio; Arcaniolo, Davide; Polara, Andrea; Imbimbo, Ciro; Grosso, G.

doi:10.1007/s00261-020-02798-8

Cited by 32 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Therefore, SB should not be omitted when performing TB. This is in line with a study by Rapisarda et al who found that agreement on final histological reporting was higher when SB was additionally performed on TB [19].…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Comparison of Accuracies between Real-Time Nonrigid and Rigid Registration in the MRI–US Fusion Biopsy of the Prostate

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is increasingly important in the detection and localization of prostate cancer. Regarding suspicious lesions on MRI, a targeted biopsy using MRI fused with ultrasound (US) is widely used. To achieve a successful targeted biopsy, a precise registration between MRI and US is essential. The purpose of our study was to show any decrease in errors using a real-time nonrigid registration technique for prostate biopsy. Nineteen patients with suspected prostate cancer were prospectively enrolled in this study. Registration accuracy was calculated by the measuring distance of corresponding points by rigid and nonrigid registration between MRI and US, and compared for rigid and nonrigid registration methods. Overall cancer detection rates were also evaluated by patient and by core. Prostate volume was measured automatically from MRI and manually from US, and compared to each other. Mean distances between the corresponding points in MRI and US were 5.32 ± 2.61 mm for rigid registration and 2.11 ± 1.37 mm for nonrigid registration (p < 0.05). Cancer was diagnosed in 11 of 19 patients (57.9%), and in 67 of 266 biopsy cores (25.2%). There was no significant difference in prostate-volume measurement between the automatic and manual methods (p = 0.89). In conclusion, nonrigid registration reduces targeting errors.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Comparison of Accuracies between Real-Time Nonrigid and Rigid Registration in the MRI–US Fusion Biopsy of the Prostate

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Moreover, in another study by Borkowetz et al, the rates of concordance and upgrading were 54 and 44% [ 19 ]. Furthermore, another report by Raipsarda et al observed high concordance rates of 67% [ 24 ]. In consequence, compared to the current literature, the SB of our study showed lower concordance rates, but also lower upgrading rates.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Correlation of MRI-Lesion Targeted Biopsy vs. Systematic Biopsy Gleason Score with Final Pathological Gleason Score after Radical Prostatectomy

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The impact of MRI-lesion targeted (TB) and systematic biopsy (SB) Gleason score (GS) as a predictor for final pathological GS still remains unclear. Methods: All patients with TB + SB, and subsequent radical prostatectomy (RP) between 01/2014-12/2020 were analyzed. Rank correlation coefficient predicted concordance with pathological GS for patients’ TB and SB GS, as well as for the combined effect of SB + TB. Results: Of 159 eligible patients, 77% were biopsy naïve. For SB taken in addition to TB, a Spearman’s correlation of +0.33 was observed regarding final GS. Rates of concordance, upgrading, and downgrading were 37.1, 37.1 and 25.8%, respectively. For TB, a +0.52 correlation was computed regarding final GS. Rates of concordance, upgrading and downgrading for TB biopsy GS were 45.9, 33.3, and 20.8%, respectively. For the combination of SB + TB, a correlation of +0.59 was observed. Rates of concordance, upgrading and downgrading were 49.7, 15.1 and 35.2%, respectively. The combined effect of SB + TB resulted in a lower upgrading rate, relative to TB and SB (both p < 0.001), but a higher downgrading rate, relative to TB (p < 0.01). Conclusions: GS obtained from TB provided higher concordance and lower upgrading and downgrading rates, relative to SB GS with regard to final pathology. The combined effect of SB + TB led to the highest concordance rate and the lowest upgrading rate.

show abstract

“…Target biopsies or random biopsies can influence grading variation, as random biopsies can result in undergrading compared to target biopsies [26,34]. This is illustrated by the finding that concordance rates between biopsy and radical prostatectomy specimens improved after multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsies [35,36]. It is possible that part of the variation was due to sampling variation.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Significant Inter- and Intralaboratory Variation in Gleason Grading of Prostate Cancer: A Nationwide Study of 35,258 Patients in The Netherlands

Flach

Willemse

Suelmann

et al. 2021

Cancers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: Our aim was to analyze grading variation between pathology laboratories and between pathologists within individual laboratories using nationwide real-life data. Methods: We retrieved synoptic (n = 13,397) and narrative (n = 29,377) needle biopsy reports from the Dutch Pathology Registry and prostate-specific antigen values from The Netherlands Cancer Registration for prostate cancer patients diagnosed between January 2017 and December 2019. We determined laboratory-specific proportions per histologic grade and unadjusted odds ratios (ORs) for International Society of Urological Pathologists Grades 1 vs. 2–5 for 40 laboratories due to treatment implications for higher grades. Pathologist-specific proportions were determined for 21 laboratories that consented to this part of analysis. The synoptic reports of 21 laboratories were used for analysis of case-mix correction for PSA, age, year of diagnosis, number of biopsies and positive cores. Results: A total of 38,321 reports of 35,258 patients were included. Grade 1 ranged between 19.7% and 44.3% per laboratory (national mean = 34.1%). Out of 40 laboratories, 22 (55%) reported a significantly deviant OR, ranging from 0.48 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.39–0.59) to 1.54 (CI 1.22–1.93). Case-mix correction was performed for 10,294 reports, altering the status of 3/21 (14%) laboratories, but increasing the observed variation (20.8% vs. 17.7%). Within 15/21 (71%) of laboratories, significant inter-pathologist variation existed. Conclusion: Substantial variation in prostate cancer grading was observed between and within Dutch pathology laboratories. Case-mix correction did not explain the variation. Better standardization of prostate cancer grading is warranted to optimize and harmonize treatment.

show abstract

The role of multiparametric resonance and biopsy in prostate cancer detection: comparison with definitive histological report after laparoscopic/robotic radical prostatectomy

Cited by 32 publications

References 35 publications

Comparison of Accuracies between Real-Time Nonrigid and Rigid Registration in the MRI–US Fusion Biopsy of the Prostate

Comparison of Accuracies between Real-Time Nonrigid and Rigid Registration in the MRI–US Fusion Biopsy of the Prostate

Correlation of MRI-Lesion Targeted Biopsy vs. Systematic Biopsy Gleason Score with Final Pathological Gleason Score after Radical Prostatectomy

Significant Inter- and Intralaboratory Variation in Gleason Grading of Prostate Cancer: A Nationwide Study of 35,258 Patients in The Netherlands

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About