A comparative study of prostate cancer detection rate between transperineal cognitive fusion targeted biopsy and software fusion targeted biopsy
10.3760/cma.j.cn112330-20200422-00319
- VernacularTitle:基于双参数磁共振的前列腺经会阴认知融合与软件融合靶向活检对前列腺癌检出率的比较
- Author:
Yifei CHENG
1
;
Linghui LIANG
;
Feng QI
;
Lei ZHANG
;
Dongliang CAO
;
Shangqian WANG
;
Gong CHENG
;
Lixin HUA
Author Information
1. 南京医科大学第一附属医院泌尿外科，南京 210000
- From:
Chinese Journal of Urology
2020;41(9):661-666
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To investigate the difference of prostate cancer (PCa) detection rate between transperineal cognitive fusion targeted biopsy (COG-TB) and software fusion targeted (FUS-TB).Methods:We retrospectively analyzed 157 patients accepted transperineal targeted biopsies from December 2018 to December 2019, including 67 cases of COG-TB and 90 cases of FUS-TB. All patients were prostate biopsy na?ve, with PSA levels ≤ 20 ng/ml and prostate imaging reporting and data system version 2.1 (PI-RADS v2.1) scores ≥ 3. There was no significant difference between COG-TB and FUS-TB in the age [(70.78 ± 8.86) vs. (70.52 ± 8.79) years old], body mass index [(24.36 ± 2.69)vs. (24.14 ± 3.15) kg/m 2], prostate volume [36.69 (27.52, 47.40) vs. 38.81 (28.80, 53.46) cm 3], PSA level [8.27 (6.0, 11.65) vs. 8.88 (6.40, 13.54) ng/ml], PSAD [0.23 (0.15, 0.36) vs. 0.21 (0.14, 0.34) ng/ml 2], suspicious digital rectal examination findings [16 (23.9%) vs. 17 (18.9%)] and PI-RADS scores [24 (35.8%), 24 (35.8%), 19 (28.4%) and 21 (23.3%) vs. 21 (23.3%), 42 (46.7%), 27 (30.0%) for PI-RADS 3, 4, and 5, respectively]. There was no significant difference in baseline characteristics between the two groups (all P<0.05). The overall and stratified detection rates of PCa and clinically significant prostate cancer (CsPCa) were compared between the two groups. The upgrading rates of Gleason score after radical prostatectomy against biopsy Gleason score were compared between the two groups. Results:There was no significant difference between COG-TB and FUS-TB in the detection rate of PCa [76.1% (51/67) vs. 68.9% (62/90), P=0.32]. Also, no significant difference was found in the detection rate of PCa stratified by PSA [0-10ng/ml: 69.1% (29/42) vs. 57.1% (28/49); 10-20ng/ml: 88.0% (22/25) vs. 82.9% (34/41); all P>0.05] and PI-RADS score [3: 45.8% (11/24) vs. 23.8% (5/21); 4: 91.7% (22/24) vs. 81.0% (34/42); 5: 94.7% (18/19) vs. 85.2% (23/27); all P>0.05]. Similarly, there was no dramatically difference between COG-TB and FUS-TB in the detection rate of CsPCa [58.2% (39//67) vs. 50.0% (45/90), P>0.05]. No significant difference was found in the detection of CsPCa stratified by PSA [0-10ng/ml: 45.2% (19/42) vs.36.7% (18/49); 10-20 ng/ml: 80.0% (20/25) vs. 65.9% (27/41) ; all P>0.05] and PI-RADS score [3: 29.2% (7/24) vs. 9.5% (2/21), 4: 66.7% (16/24) vs. 57.1% (24/42), 5: 84.2%(16/19) vs. 70.4% (19/27) ; all P>0.05]. Additionally, the two technique was not different significantly in the upgrading rate [28.9% (13/45) vs. 26.2% (11/42), P=0.78]. Conclusions:There is no significant difference between FUS-TB and COG-TB in the detection rate of PCa and CsPCa, along with the upgrading rate after RP in patients with PSA ≤ 20 ng / ml and PI-RADS v2.1 score≥3.
