Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
The best prostate biopsy sampling system-fusion and systematic biopsy: A single center experience.
Califano, Alfonso; Caputo, Alessandro; D'Antonio, Antonio; Ciccone, Vincenzo; Fabiano, Marco; Maiorino, Francesco; Simeone, Davide; Pace, Leonardo; Rega, Anna; Zeppa, Pio; Altieri, Vincenzo.
Afiliación
  • Califano A; Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy.
  • Caputo A; Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Salerno, Salerno, Italy.
  • D'Antonio A; University Hospital "San Giovanni di Dio e Ruggi D'Aragona," Salerno, Campania, Italy.
  • Ciccone V; University Hospital "San Giovanni di Dio e Ruggi D'Aragona," Salerno, Campania, Italy.
  • Fabiano M; Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Salerno, Salerno, Italy.
  • Maiorino F; Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy.
  • Simeone D; Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Salerno, Salerno, Italy.
  • Pace L; Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Salerno, Salerno, Italy.
  • Rega A; University Hospital "San Giovanni di Dio e Ruggi D'Aragona," Salerno, Campania, Italy.
  • Zeppa P; University Hospital "San Giovanni di Dio e Ruggi D'Aragona," Salerno, Campania, Italy.
  • Altieri V; Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Salerno, Salerno, Italy.
Urologia ; 89(4): 529-534, 2022 Nov.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34965795
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

Prostate cancer is the second most commonly diagnosed cancer in men. The diagnostic accuracy in prostate cancer can be increased by employing a preliminary multiparametric MRI followed by a fusion-targeted biopsy.

METHODS:

To compare the diagnostic accuracy of fusion-targeted biopsy with the standard systematic biopsy in prostate cancer patients, we enrolled 139 patients on which we performed 139 prostate biopsies consisting of three targeted samples followed by 12 regular systematic samples. Based on histology, we analyzed the diagnostic performance of the two methods.

RESULTS:

Both methods were equally good at detecting clinically significant cancer (83.3%, 50/60), while systematic biopsy detected more clinically insignificant cancers. However, the best diagnostic performance is obtained by combining the two methods.

CONCLUSION:

The two methods are best seen as synergistic, and the addition of fusion biopsy can be used to detect more clinically significant prostate cancers than systematic biopsy alone.
Asunto(s)
Palabras clave

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Neoplasias de la Próstata / Imágenes de Resonancia Magnética Multiparamétrica Tipo de estudio: Diagnostic_studies Límite: Humans / Male Idioma: En Revista: Urologia Año: 2022 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Italia

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Neoplasias de la Próstata / Imágenes de Resonancia Magnética Multiparamétrica Tipo de estudio: Diagnostic_studies Límite: Humans / Male Idioma: En Revista: Urologia Año: 2022 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Italia