Çetin Serhat, Çelik Serdar, Koparal Murat Yavuz, Aslan Güven, Yazici Sertaç, Şahin Bahadır, Sözen Sinan, Türkeri Levent
Department of Urology, Faculty of Medicine, Gazi University, Ankara, Turkiye.
Department of Urology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Health Sciences, Bozyaka Training and Research Hospital, İzmir, Turkiye.
Turk J Med Sci. 2024 Sep 3;54(6):1327-1334. doi: 10.55730/1300-0144.5916. eCollection 2024.
BACKGROUND/AIM: This study aims to compare the success rates of rigid registration (RR) and elastic registration (ER) systems in diagnosing all cancers and clinically significant prostate cancer (csPC) in software-based targeted prostate biopsies (TPBs) by performing matching analysis.
The data of 2061 patients from six centers where software-based TPB is performed were used. All cancer and csPC detection rates of the RR and ER systems were compared following Mahalanobis distance matching with the propensity score caliper method. Logistic regression analysis was applied to identify factors predicting clinically insignificant prostate cancer (ciPC) and csPC diagnoses. Additionally, the International Society of Urological Pathology Grade Group (ISUP GG) upgrade rates of RR and ER systems were compared between biopsy and radical prostatectomy pathologies.
The matched sample included 157 RR and 157 ER patients. No statistically significant difference was found between ER and RR in terms of csPC detection rate (28.0% vs. 22.3% respectively, p = 0.242). The detection rate of all cancers by ER compared to RR was found to be significantly higher (54.8% vs. 35.7% respectively p < 0.001,). No statistically significant difference was found between the ER and RR groups regarding pathological upgrade (39.7% vs. 24.2% respectively, p = 0.130). In the logistic regression analysis performed to determine the factors predicting ciPC, decreased prostate volume and ER system use were found to be independent predictive factors.
While the detection rate of csPC was similar for the RR and ER systems, the detection rate of all cancers and ciPC was significantly higher with the ER systems.
背景/目的：本研究旨在通过匹配分析，比较基于软件的靶向前列腺活检（TPB）中刚性配准（RR）和弹性配准（ER）系统在诊断所有癌症及临床显著前列腺癌（csPC）方面的成功率。
使用了来自六个进行基于软件的TPB的中心的2061例患者的数据。采用倾向得分卡尺法进行马氏距离匹配后，比较RR和ER系统的所有癌症及csPC检测率。应用逻辑回归分析确定预测临床意义不显著前列腺癌（ciPC）和csPC诊断的因素。此外，比较了活检和前列腺癌根治术病理中RR和ER系统的国际泌尿病理学会分级组（ISUP GG）升级率。
匹配样本包括157例RR患者和157例ER患者。在csPC检测率方面，ER和RR之间未发现统计学显著差异（分别为28.0%和22.3%，p = 0.242）。发现ER相比RR的所有癌症检测率显著更高（分别为54.8%和35.7%，p < 0.001）。在病理升级方面，ER组和RR组之间未发现统计学显著差异（分别为39.7%和24.2%，p = 0.130）。在确定预测ciPC的因素的逻辑回归分析中，发现前列腺体积减小和使用ER系统是独立预测因素。
虽然RR和ER系统的csPC检测率相似，但ER系统的所有癌症和ciPC检测率显著更高。
