Department of Urology, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Institutes of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
J Urol. 2018 Aug;200(2):309-318. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2018.02.067. Epub 2018 Feb 21.
We evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging/transrectal ultrasound fusion guided targeted biopsy against that of transperineal template saturation prostate biopsy to detect prostate cancer.
We retrospectively analyzed the records of 415 men who consecutively presented for prostate biopsy between November 2014 and September 2016 at our tertiary care center. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging was performed using a 3 Tesla device without an endorectal coil, followed by transperineal template saturation prostate biopsy with the BiopSee® fusion system. Additional fusion guided targeted biopsy was done in men with a suspicious lesion on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging, defined as Likert score 3 to 5. Any Gleason pattern 4 or greater was defined as clinically significant prostate cancer. The detection rates of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and fusion guided targeted biopsy were compared with the detection rate of transperineal template saturation prostate biopsy using the McNemar test.
We obtained a median of 40 (range 30 to 55) and 3 (range 2 to 4) transperineal template saturation prostate biopsy and fusion guided targeted biopsy cores, respectively. Of the 124 patients (29.9%) without a suspicious lesion on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging 32 (25.8%) were found to have clinically significant prostate cancer on transperineal template saturation prostate biopsy. Of the 291 patients (70.1%) with a Likert score of 3 to 5 clinically significant prostate cancer was detected in 129 (44.3%) by multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging fusion guided targeted biopsy, in 176 (60.5%) by transperineal template saturation prostate biopsy and in 187 (64.3%) by the combined approach. Overall 58 cases (19.9%) of clinically significant prostate cancer would have been missed if fusion guided targeted biopsy had been performed exclusively. The sensitivity of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and fusion guided targeted biopsy for clinically significant prostate cancer was 84.6% and 56.7% with a negative likelihood ratio of 0.35 and 0.46, respectively.
Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging alone should not be performed as a triage test due to a substantial number of false-negative cases with clinically significant prostate cancer. Systematic biopsy outperformed fusion guided targeted biopsy. Therefore, it will remain crucial in the diagnostic pathway of prostate cancer.
我们评估了多参数磁共振成像(mpMRI)和 mpMRI/经直肠超声融合引导靶向活检与经会阴模板前列腺饱和活检(TPB)在检测前列腺癌方面的诊断准确性。
我们回顾性分析了 2014 年 11 月至 2016 年 9 月在我们的三级保健中心连续进行前列腺活检的 415 名男性的记录。mpMRI 使用 3T 设备进行,不使用直肠内线圈,随后使用 BiopSee®融合系统进行经会阴模板前列腺饱和活检。在 mpMRI 上有可疑病灶的男性中进行了额外的融合引导靶向活检,将可疑病灶定义为 Likert 评分 3 至 5。任何 Gleason 模式 4 或更高定义为临床显著前列腺癌。采用 McNemar 检验比较了 mpMRI 和融合引导靶向活检的检出率与 TPB 的检出率。
我们分别获得了中位数为 40(范围 30 至 55)和 3(范围 2 至 4)个经会阴模板前列腺饱和活检和融合引导靶向活检的核心。在 124 名(29.9%)mpMRI 上无可疑病灶的患者中,32 名(25.8%)经会阴模板前列腺饱和活检发现有临床显著前列腺癌。在 291 名(70.1%)Likert 评分 3 至 5 的患者中,129 名(44.3%)通过 mpMRI 融合引导靶向活检、176 名(60.5%)通过 TPB 和 187 名(64.3%)通过联合方法发现有临床显著前列腺癌。如果仅进行融合引导靶向活检,将漏诊 58 例(19.9%)临床显著前列腺癌。mpMRI 和融合引导靶向活检对临床显著前列腺癌的敏感性分别为 84.6%和 56.7%,阴性似然比分别为 0.35 和 0.46。
由于有大量具有临床意义的前列腺癌的假阴性病例,mpMRI 不应单独作为一种分诊试验。系统活检优于融合引导靶向活检。因此,它在前列腺癌的诊断途径中仍然至关重要。