Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Intra-practice Urologist-level Variation in Targeted Fusion Biopsy Outcomes.
Dhir, Apoorv; Ellimoottil, Chad S; Qi, Ji; Zhu, Alex; Wang, Robert S; Montgomery, Jeffrey S; Salami, Simpa S; Wei, John T; Shankar, Prasad R; Davenport, Matthew S; Curci, Nicole E; Millet, John D; Wu, Chen-Yu; Johnson, Anna; Miller, David C; George, Arvin K.
Afiliación
  • Dhir A; Institute for Healthcare Policy and Innovation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; Dow Division of Health Services Research, Department of Urology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
  • Ellimoottil CS; Institute for Healthcare Policy and Innovation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; Dow Division of Health Services Research, Department of Urology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
  • Qi J; Institute for Healthcare Policy and Innovation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; Dow Division of Health Services Research, Department of Urology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
  • Zhu A; Institute for Healthcare Policy and Innovation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; Dow Division of Health Services Research, Department of Urology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
  • Wang RS; Institute for Healthcare Policy and Innovation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; Dow Division of Health Services Research, Department of Urology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
  • Montgomery JS; Institute for Healthcare Policy and Innovation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; Dow Division of Health Services Research, Department of Urology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
  • Salami SS; Institute for Healthcare Policy and Innovation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; Dow Division of Health Services Research, Department of Urology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
  • Wei JT; Institute for Healthcare Policy and Innovation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; Dow Division of Health Services Research, Department of Urology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
  • Shankar PR; Institute for Healthcare Policy and Innovation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; Michigan Medicine, Department of Radiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
  • Davenport MS; Dow Division of Health Services Research, Department of Urology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; Michigan Medicine, Department of Radiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
  • Curci NE; Michigan Medicine, Department of Radiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
  • Millet JD; Michigan Medicine, Department of Radiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
  • Wu CY; Institute for Healthcare Policy and Innovation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; Dow Division of Health Services Research, Department of Urology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
  • Johnson A; Institute for Healthcare Policy and Innovation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; Dow Division of Health Services Research, Department of Urology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
  • Miller DC; Institute for Healthcare Policy and Innovation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; Dow Division of Health Services Research, Department of Urology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
  • George AK; Institute for Healthcare Policy and Innovation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; Dow Division of Health Services Research, Department of Urology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI. Electronic address: arvinkgeorge@gmail.com.
Urology ; 177: 122-127, 2023 Jul.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37121355
ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE:

To examine the extent to which the urologist performing biopsy contributes to variation in prostate cancer detection during fusion-guided prostate biopsy.

METHODS:

All men in the Michigan Urological Surgery Improvement Collaborative (MUSIC) clinical registry who underwent fusion biopsy at Michigan Medicine from August 2017 to March 2019 were included. The primary outcomes were clinically significant cancer detection rate (defined as Gleason Grade ≥2) in targeted cores and clinically significant cancer detection on targeted cores stratified by PI-RADS score. Bivariate and multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed.

RESULTS:

A total of 1133 fusion biopsies performed by 5 providers were included. When adjusting for patient age, PSA, race, family history, prostate volume, clinical stage, and PI-RADS score, there was no significant difference in targeted clinically significant cancer detection rates across providers (range = 38.5%-46.9%, adjusted P-value = .575). Clinically significant cancer detection rates ranged from 11.1% to 16.7% in PI-RADS 3 (unadjusted P = .838), from 24.6% to 43.4% in PI-RADS 4 (adjusted P = .003), and from 69.4% to 78.8% in PI-RADS 5 (adjusted P = .766) lesions.

CONCLUSION:

There was a statistically significant difference in clinically significant prostate cancer detection in PI-RADS 4 lesions across providers. These findings suggest that even among experienced providers, variation at the urologist level may contribute to differences in clinically significant cancer detection rates within PI-RADS 4 lesions. However, the relative impact of biopsy technique, radiologist interpretation, and MR acquisition protocol requires further study.
Asunto(s)

Texto completo: 1 Base de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Neoplasias de la Próstata / Imagen por Resonancia Magnética Intervencional Tipo de estudio: Diagnostic_studies / Guideline / Observational_studies Idioma: En Revista: Urology Año: 2023 Tipo del documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Neoplasias de la Próstata / Imagen por Resonancia Magnética Intervencional Tipo de estudio: Diagnostic_studies / Guideline / Observational_studies Idioma: En Revista: Urology Año: 2023 Tipo del documento: Article