Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
The impact of prostate volume estimation on the risk-adapted biopsy decision based on prostate-specific antigen density and magnetic resonance imaging score.
Baudewyns, Arthur; Guenzel, Karsten; Halinski, Adam; Dariane, Charles; Delavar, Gina; Anract, Julien; Barry Delongchamps, Nicolas; Jabbour, Teddy; Bourgeno, Henri-Alexandre; Lefebvre, Yolène; Ferriero, Mariaconsiglia; Simone, Giuseppe; Fourcade, Alexandre; Fournier, Georges; Oderda, Marco; Gontero, Paolo; Bernal-Gomez, Adrian; Mastrorosa, Alessandro; Roche, Jean-Baptiste; Zahr, Rawad Abou; Ploussard, Guillaume; Fiard, Gaelle; Rysankova, Katerina; Bui, Alexandre Patrick; Taha, Fayek; Windisch, Olivier; Benamran, Daniel; Vlahopoulos, Léonidas; Assenmacher, Gregoire; Roumeguère, Thierry; Peltier, Alexandre; Diamand, Romain.
Afiliación
  • Baudewyns A; Department of Urology, Jules Bordet Institute-Erasme Hospital, Hôpital Universitaire de Bruxelles, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium.
  • Guenzel K; Department of Urology, Vivantes Klinikum Am Urban, Berlin, Deutschland.
  • Halinski A; Department of Urology, Private Medical Center "Klinika Wisniowa", Zielona Góra, Poland.
  • Dariane C; Department of Urology, Hôpital Européen Georges-Pompidou, Université de Paris/U1151 Inserm/Institut Necker Enfants-Malades, Paris, France.
  • Delavar G; Departement of Urology, Hôpital Cochin, Paris, France.
  • Anract J; Departement of Urology, Hôpital Cochin, Paris, France.
  • Barry Delongchamps N; Departement of Urology, Hôpital Cochin, Paris, France.
  • Jabbour T; Department of Urology, Jules Bordet Institute-Erasme Hospital, Hôpital Universitaire de Bruxelles, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium.
  • Bourgeno HA; Department of Urology, Jules Bordet Institute-Erasme Hospital, Hôpital Universitaire de Bruxelles, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium.
  • Lefebvre Y; Department of Radiology, Jules Bordet Institute-Erasme Hospital, Hôpital Universitaire de Bruxelles, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium.
  • Ferriero M; Department of Urology, IRCCS "Regina Elena" National Cancer Institute, Rome, Italy.
  • Simone G; Department of Urology, IRCCS "Regina Elena" National Cancer Institute, Rome, Italy.
  • Fourcade A; Department of Urology, Hôpital Cavale Blanche, CHRU Brest, Brest, France.
  • Fournier G; Department of Urology, Hôpital Cavale Blanche, CHRU Brest, Brest, France.
  • Oderda M; Department of Urology, Città Della Salute E Della Scienza Di Torino, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.
  • Gontero P; Department of Urology, Città Della Salute E Della Scienza Di Torino, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.
  • Bernal-Gomez A; Department of Urology, Clinique Saint-Augustin, Bordeaux, France.
  • Mastrorosa A; Department of Urology, Clinique Saint-Augustin, Bordeaux, France.
  • Roche JB; Department of Urology, Clinique Saint-Augustin, Bordeaux, France.
  • Zahr RA; Department of Urology, La Croix du Sud Hospital, Quint Fonsegrives, France.
  • Ploussard G; Department of Urology, La Croix du Sud Hospital, Quint Fonsegrives, France.
  • Fiard G; Department of Urology, Grenoble Alpes University Hospital, Université Grenoble Alpes, CNRS, Grenoble INP, TIMC, Grenoble, France.
  • Rysankova K; Department of Urology, University Hospital Ostrava, Ostrava, Czech Republic.
  • Bui AP; Department of Urology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Reims, Reims, France.
  • Taha F; Department of Urology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Reims, Reims, France.
  • Windisch O; Department of Urology, Hôpitaux Universitaires de Genève, Geneva, Switzerland.
  • Benamran D; Department of Urology, Hôpitaux Universitaires de Genève, Geneva, Switzerland.
  • Vlahopoulos L; Department of Urology, Cliniques de L'Europe-Saint Elisabeth, Brussels, Belgium.
  • Assenmacher G; Department of Urology, Cliniques de L'Europe-Saint Elisabeth, Brussels, Belgium.
  • Roumeguère T; Department of Urology, Jules Bordet Institute-Erasme Hospital, Hôpital Universitaire de Bruxelles, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium.
  • Peltier A; Department of Urology, Jules Bordet Institute-Erasme Hospital, Hôpital Universitaire de Bruxelles, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium.
  • Diamand R; Department of Urology, Jules Bordet Institute-Erasme Hospital, Hôpital Universitaire de Bruxelles, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium. romain.diamand@hubruxelles.be.
World J Urol ; 42(1): 322, 2024 May 15.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38747982
ABSTRACT

PURPOSE:

Utility of prostate-specific antigen density (PSAd) for risk-stratification to avoid unnecessary biopsy remains unclear due to the lack of standardization of prostate volume estimation. We evaluated the impact of ellipsoidal formula using multiparametric magnetic resonance (MRI) and semi-automated segmentation using tridimensional ultrasound (3D-US) on prostate volume and PSAd estimations as well as the distribution of patients in a risk-adapted table of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa).

METHODS:

In a prospectively maintained database of 4841 patients who underwent MRI-targeted and systematic biopsies, 971 met inclusions criteria. Correlation of volume estimation was assessed by Kendall's correlation coefficient and graphically represented by scatter and Bland-Altman plots. Distribution of csPCa was presented using the Schoots risk-adapted table based on PSAd and PI-RADS score. The model was evaluated using discrimination, calibration plots and decision curve analysis (DCA).

RESULTS:

Median prostate volume estimation using 3D-US was higher compared to MRI (49cc[IQR 37-68] vs 47cc[IQR 35-66], p < 0.001). Significant correlation between imaging modalities was observed (τ = 0.73[CI 0.7-0.75], p < 0.001). Bland-Altman plot emphasizes the differences in prostate volume estimation. Using the Schoots risk-adapted table, a high risk of csPCa was observed in PI-RADS 2 combined with high PSAd, and in all PI-RADS 4-5. The risk of csPCa was proportional to the PSAd for PI-RADS 3 patients. Good accuracy (AUC of 0.69 and 0.68 using 3D-US and MRI, respectively), adequate calibration and a higher net benefit when using 3D-US for probability thresholds above 25% on DCA.

CONCLUSIONS:

Prostate volume estimation with semi-automated segmentation using 3D-US should be preferred to the ellipsoidal formula (MRI) when evaluating PSAd and the risk of csPCa.
Asunto(s)
Palabras clave

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Próstata / Neoplasias de la Próstata / Antígeno Prostático Específico Límite: Aged / Humans / Male / Middle aged Idioma: En Revista: World J Urol Año: 2024 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Bélgica

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Próstata / Neoplasias de la Próstata / Antígeno Prostático Específico Límite: Aged / Humans / Male / Middle aged Idioma: En Revista: World J Urol Año: 2024 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Bélgica
...