Morote Juan, Picola Natàlia, Muñoz-Rodriguez Jesús, Paesano Nahuel, Ruiz-Plazas Xavier, Muñoz-Rivero Marta V, Celma Ana, García-de Manuel Gemma, Miró Berta, Abascal José M, Servian Pol
Department of Urology, Vall d'Hebron Hospital, Barcelona, Spain.
Department of Surgery, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
World J Mens Health. 2024 Apr;42(2):441-448. doi: 10.5534/wjmh.230028. Epub 2024 Jan 2.
To relate the prostate volume category (PVC) assessed with digital rectal examination (DRE)-small, median, and large-and the prostate volumes (PVs) assessed with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and transrectal ultrasound (TRUS). To compare the clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) discrimination ability of two predictive models based on DRE-PVC and MRI-PV.
A prospective trial of 2,090 men with prostate-specific antigen >3 ng/mL and/or PCa suspicious DRE were prospectively recruited in 10 centers from Catalonia (Spain), between 2021 and 2022, in whom DRE-PVC was assessed. Pre-biopsy MRI, and 12-core TRUS-random biopsy was always performed after 2- to 6-core TRUS-fusion targeted biopsy of prostate imaging-report and data system >3 lesions. In 370 men (17.7%) the DRE-PVC was unconclusive. Among the 1,720 men finally analyzed the csPCa (grade group >2) detection was 42.4%.
The median (interquartile range) of TRUS and MRI-PVs of small prostates were 33 mL (19-37 mL) and 35 mL (23-30 mL), p=0.410; in median prostates they were 51 mL (38-58 mL) and 55 mL (48-63 mL) respectively, p<0.001; in large prostates 80 mL (60-100 mL) and 95 mL (75-118 mL) respectively, p<0.001. The predictive models sharing the MRI-PV and DRE-PVC showed areas under the curves of 0.832 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.813-0.851) and 0.828 (95% CI, 0.809-0.848) respectively, p=0.632, as well as similar net benefit and clinical utility.
PVC was unconclusive in 17% of DREs. MRI-PV overestimated the TRUS-PV in median and large prostates. The predictive models based on MRI-PV and DRE-PVC showed similar efficacy to predict csPCa. PVC assessed with DRE is helpful to predict the csPCa risk before MRI.
将通过直肠指检(DRE)评估的前列腺体积类别(PVC)——小、中、大——与通过磁共振成像(MRI)和经直肠超声(TRUS)评估的前列腺体积(PV)相关联。比较基于DRE-PVC和MRI-PV的两种预测模型对临床显著性前列腺癌(csPCa)的鉴别能力。
2021年至2022年期间,在西班牙加泰罗尼亚的10个中心前瞻性招募了2090名前列腺特异性抗原>3 ng/mL和/或直肠指检怀疑患有前列腺癌的男性,对其进行DRE-PVC评估。活检前进行MRI检查,在对前列腺影像报告和数据系统>3个病灶进行2至6针TRUS融合靶向活检后,始终进行12针TRUS随机活检。在370名男性(17.7%)中,DRE-PVC结果不明确。在最终分析的1720名男性中,csPCa(分级组>2)的检出率为42.4%。
小前列腺的TRUS和MRI-PV的中位数(四分位间距)分别为33 mL(19 - 37 mL)和35 mL(23 - 30 mL),p = 0.410;中等大小前列腺的分别为51 mL(38 - 58 mL)和55 mL(48 - 63 mL),p < 0.001;大前列腺的分别为80 mL(60 - 100 mL)和95 mL(75 - 118 mL),p < 0.001。共享MRI-PV和DRE-PVC的预测模型的曲线下面积分别为0.832(95%置信区间[CI],0.813 - 0.851)和0.828(95% CI,0.809 - 0.848),p = 0.632,以及相似的净效益和临床实用性。
17%的直肠指检中PVC结果不明确。在中等大小和大前列腺中,MRI-PV高估了TRUS-PV。基于MRI-PV和DRE-PVC的预测模型在预测csPCa方面显示出相似的疗效。通过直肠指检评估的PVC有助于在MRI检查前预测csPCa风险。