Department of Urology, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein/Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Department of Urology, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein/Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Eur Urol. 2017 Apr;71(4):517-531. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2016.07.041. Epub 2016 Aug 25.
The introduction of magnetic resonance imaging-guided biopsies (MRI-GB) has changed the paradigm concerning prostate biopsies. Three techniques of MRI-GB are available: (1) in-bore MRI target biopsy (MRI-TB), (2) MRI-transrectal ultrasound fusion (FUS-TB), and (3) cognitive registration (COG-TB).
To evaluate whether MRI-GB has increased detection rates of (clinically significant) prostate cancer (PCa) compared with transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy (TRUS-GB) in patients at risk for PCa, and which technique of MRI-GB has the highest detection rate of (clinically significant) PCa.
We performed a literature search in PubMed, Embase, and CENTRAL databases. Studies were evaluated using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 checklist and START recommendations. The initial search identified 2562 studies and 43 were included in the meta-analysis.
Among the included studies 11 used MRI-TB, 17 used FUS-TB, 11 used COG-TB, and four used a combination of techniques. In 34 studies concurrent TRUS-GB was performed. There was no significant difference between MRI-GB (all techniques combined) and TRUS-GB for overall PCa detection (relative risk [RR] 0.97 [0.90-1.07]). MRI-GB had higher detection rates of clinically significant PCa (csPCa) compared with TRUS-GB (RR 1.16 [1.02-1.32]), and a lower yield of insignificant PCa (RR 0.47 [0.35-0.63]). There was a significant advantage (p = 0.02) of MRI-TB compared with COG-TB for overall PCa detection. For overall PCa detection there was no significant advantage of MRI-TB compared with FUS-TB (p=0.13), and neither for FUS-TB compared with COG-TB (p=0.11). For csPCa detection there was no significant advantage of any one technique of MRI-GB. The impact of lesion characteristics such as size and localisation could not be assessed.
MRI-GB had similar overall PCa detection rates compared with TRUS-GB, increased rates of csPCa, and decreased rates of insignificant PCa. MRI-TB has a superior overall PCa detection compared with COG-TB. FUS-TB and MRI-TB appear to have similar detection rates. Head-to-head comparisons of MRI-GB techniques are limited and are needed to confirm our findings.
Our review shows that magnetic resonance imaging-guided biopsy detects more clinically significant prostate cancer (PCa) and less insignificant PCa compared with systematic biopsy in men at risk for PCa.
磁共振成像引导活检(MRI-GB)的引入改变了前列腺活检的模式。目前有三种 MRI-GB 技术:(1)腔内 MRI 靶向活检(MRI-TB),(2)MRI-经直肠超声融合(FUS-TB),和(3)认知配准(COG-TB)。
评估 MRI-GB 与经直肠超声引导活检(TRUS-GB)相比,在有前列腺癌(PCa)风险的患者中是否能提高(临床显著)PCa 的检出率,以及哪种 MRI-GB 技术具有最高的(临床显著)PCa 检出率。
我们在 PubMed、Embase 和 CENTRAL 数据库中进行了文献检索。使用诊断准确性研究质量评估-2 清单和 START 建议对研究进行评估。最初的搜索确定了 2562 项研究,其中 43 项被纳入荟萃分析。
纳入的研究中,11 项使用了 MRI-TB,17 项使用了 FUS-TB,11 项使用了 COG-TB,4 项使用了联合技术。在 34 项研究中同时进行了 TRUS-GB。MRI-GB(所有技术联合)与 TRUS-GB 相比,总体 PCa 检出率无显著差异(相对风险 [RR]0.97[0.90-1.07])。MRI-GB 检测到的临床显著 PCa(csPCa)比率高于 TRUS-GB(RR1.16[1.02-1.32]),而检测到的不显著 PCa(RR0.47[0.35-0.63])比率较低。MRI-TB 与 COG-TB 相比,总体 PCa 检出率有显著优势(p=0.02)。MRI-TB 与 FUS-TB 相比,总体 PCa 检出率无显著优势(p=0.13),而 FUS-TB 与 COG-TB 相比,也无显著优势(p=0.11)。MRI-GB 中任何一种技术对 csPCa 的检出率均无显著优势。病变特征(如大小和定位)的影响无法评估。
MRI-GB 与 TRUS-GB 相比,总体 PCa 检出率相似,csPCa 检出率提高,不显著 PCa 检出率降低。MRI-TB 与 COG-TB 相比,总体 PCa 检出率更高。FUS-TB 和 MRI-TB 似乎具有相似的检出率。MRI-GB 技术的头对头比较有限,需要进一步研究证实我们的发现。
我们的综述表明,与系统活检相比,磁共振成像引导活检在有前列腺癌风险的男性中可检测到更多的临床显著前列腺癌(PCa),并减少不显著 PCa 的检出。