Application Value of Transperineal Biopsy Using Electromagnetic Needle Tracking Combined with Rapid Paraffin-Embedded Section of Small Specimen in Diagnosis of Prostate Cancer
10.3971/j.issn.1000-8578.2024.24.0111
- VernacularTitle:电磁引导经会阴前列腺穿刺联合小标本快脱病理学检查在前列腺癌诊断中的应用价值
- Author:
Yongjun YANG
1
;
Yiming ZENG
1
;
Xianya HE
1
;
Qiang LU
1
;
Yuanwei LI
1
Author Information
1. Department of Urology, Hunan Provincial People's Hospital, The First Affiliated Hospital of Hunan Normal University, Changsha 410005, China.
- Publication Type:CLINICALAPPLICATION
- Keywords:
Prostate cancer;
Small specimen;
Transperineal;
Targeted biopsies;
Rapid paraffin-embedded section
- From:
Cancer Research on Prevention and Treatment
2024;51(10):864-869
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective To explore the application value of mpMRI-TRUS multi-modal image fusion transperineal biopsy technique using electromagnetic needle tracking under local anesthesia combined with rapid paraffin-embedded section of small specimen in the diagnosis of prostate cancer. Methods The clinicopathological data of 138 patients with PI-RADS score≥3 who underwent mpMRI-TRUS image fusion transperineal biopsy using electromagnetic needle tracking under local anesthesia were retrospectively analyzed. AI technology was used to fuse mpMRI and TRUS multi-mode images, and two-core targeted biopsies were performed on suspicious lesions, followed by 12-core systematic biopsies. The specimens obtained from targeted biopsies were sent for rapid paraffin-embedded section pathological examination, and the detection rates of csPCa were compared. Results The detection rate of csPCa in 138 patients was 71.01%. The detection rates of csPCa in targeted biopsies and systematic biopsies were 62.32% and 70.29%, respectively (P=0.20). The detection rate of combined biopsies was higher than those of targeted biopsies and systematic biopsies, but the difference was not statistically significant (P>0.05). The detection rates of csPCa in targeted biopsies, systematic biopsies, and combined biopsies in patients with PI-RADS score 3 were 30.95%, 38.10%, and 40.48%, respectively; and the percentages were 52.94%, 61.76%, and 61.76% in patients with PI-RADS score 4, respectively; and the percentages were 90.32%, 96.77%, and 96.77% in patients with PI-RADS score 5, respectively, without statistically significant difference (all P>0.05). In the subgroups with PI-RADS scores of 3, 4, and 5, the missed diagnosis rates of csPCa by targeted biopsies were 23.53%, 14.29%, and 6.67%, respectively. Conclusion For patients with suspected prostate cancer and PI-RADS v2.1 score≥3, transperineal biopsy using electromagnetic needle tracking combined with rapid paraffin-embedded section of small specimen can obtain pathological results rapidly and has good diagnostic accuracy. However, combined biopsy is still the most suitable method for the diagnosis of prostate cancer at present.
