Hubbard Samuel, Wells Shane A, Olson Kelly, Jarrard David F, Huang Wei
Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health Madison, WI, USA.
Department of Radiology, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health Madison, WI, USA.
Am J Transl Res. 2021 Oct 15;13(10):12107-12113. eCollection 2021.
In this retrospective study we compared the PCa detection rates between combined (combined MRI/US fusion targeted biopsy with concurrent standard biopsy) and standard systemic, combined and targeted (component), and targeted (component) and concurrent standard (component) biopsies.
Two cohorts, totaling 735 cases, were selected from the University of Wisconsin Pathology archive. 390 cases (cohort 1) were combined biopsies from 2017-2020 and 345 cases (cohort 2) were part of the standard US-guided systematic biopsies from the same period. PCa was stratified into three categories: low, intermediate, and high risks.
We found that combined biopsy was significantly better than the standard biopsy in detection of PCa (65.4% vs. 51.6%, P<0.01) and intermediate-risk PCa (18.7% vs. 10.4%, P=0.05) but only slightly better at detecting high-risk PCa (26.7% vs. 23.5%, P=0.32). Further examining the biopsy results in cohort 1, we found that combined biopsy was superior to targeted biopsy (65.4% vs. 56.9%, P=0.02) or concurrent standard biopsy (65.4% vs. 52.1%, P=0.0002) in PCa detection. Combined biopsy detected significantly more high-risk PCa than concurrent standard biopsy (26.7% vs. 17.4, P=0.002), but the difference in detecting high-risk PCa between combined and targeted biopsies was not significant (26.7% vs. 22.1%, P=0.133). Similarly, the differences in detecting PCa and high-risk PCa between targeted and concurrent standard biopsies were not significant (56.9% vs. 52.1%, P=0.172 and 22.1% vs. 17.4, P=0.133, respectively). Both targeted and concurrent standard biopsies missed PCa of each risk level.
Combined MRI/US fusion targeted plus standard prostate biopsy is a superior technique for the detection of PCa and clinically significant PCa.
在这项回顾性研究中,我们比较了联合活检(MRI/超声融合靶向活检联合同期标准活检)与标准系统活检、联合活检与靶向活检(部分活检)以及靶向活检(部分活检)与同期标准活检(部分活检)之间前列腺癌(PCa)的检出率。
从威斯康星大学病理学档案中选取了两个队列,共735例病例。390例(队列1)为2017 - 2020年的联合活检病例,345例(队列2)为同期标准超声引导下系统活检病例。PCa被分为低、中、高风险三类。
我们发现联合活检在PCa检出率(65.4%对51.6%,P<0.01)和中风险PCa检出率(18.7%对10.4%,P = 0.05)方面显著优于标准活检,但在高风险PCa检出率方面仅略优于标准活检(26.7%对23.5%,P = 0.32)。进一步检查队列1的活检结果,我们发现联合活检在PCa检出方面优于靶向活检(65.4%对56.9%,P = 0.02)或同期标准活检(65.4%对52.1%,P = 0.0002)。联合活检检出的高风险PCa显著多于同期标准活检(26.7%对17.4%,P = 0.002),但联合活检与靶向活检在高风险PCa检出方面的差异不显著(26.7%对22.1%,P = 0.133)。同样,靶向活检与同期标准活检在PCa和高风险PCa检出方面的差异也不显著(分别为56.9%对52.1%,P = 0.172;22.1%对17.4%,P = 0.133)。靶向活检和同期标准活检均遗漏了各风险水平的PCa。
MRI/超声融合靶向联合标准前列腺活检是检测PCa及具有临床意义的PCa的一种更优技术。