Analysis of diagnostic efficacy of targeted biopsy versus targeted biopsy combined with systematic biopsy for patients with PI-RADS score of 4-5
10.3760/cma.j.cn112330-20200722-00553
- VernacularTitle:靶向穿刺与靶向联合系统穿刺对前列腺PI-RADS评分4～5分患者的诊断效能比较
- Author:
Yu LIU
;
Jie GAO
;
Wei WANG
;
Qing ZHANG
;
Xiaozhi ZHAO
;
Haifeng HUANG
;
Danyan LI
;
Yao FU
;
Hongqian GUO
- From:
Chinese Journal of Urology
2021;42(3):192-196
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To analyze the diagnostic efficacy of targeted biopsy (TB) versus targeted biopsy combined with systematic biopsy (TB+ SB) for patients with multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) prostate imaging-reporting and data system (PI-RADS) score of 4-5.Methods:The clinical data of 378 patients with mpMRI PI-RADS score of 4-5 in Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital from January 2018 to February 2020 who received prostate TB+ SB were retrospectively analyzed. Median age was 69 (64, 75) years old, median prostate specific antigen was 9.5 (6.7, 16.3) ng/ ml, and median prostate volume was 34.1 (23.5, 48.4) ml. There were 240 cases with PI-RADS score of 4 and 138 cases with PI-RADS score of 5. Evaluating Gleason score of positive biopsy pathology and using χ 2 test or Fisher exact test to analyze the detection of prostate cancer (PCa) and clinically significant prostate cancer(CsPCa) by TB versus TB+ SB. Results:Of the all 378 cases, 88 cases (23.3%) were negative and 290 cases (76.7%) were positive. The average number of needle for TB was 2.4 per person, while SB was 12 per person. TB and SB had no statistically significant difference in the detection rate of PCa (73.3% vs. 68.3%, P=0.129) and CsPCa (55.8% vs. 49.7%, P=0.094) and in the accuracy (79.1% vs. 77.8%, P=0.658), but had a statistically significant difference in the positive rate (64.2% vs. 23.1%, P < 0.001). The pathological coincidence rate of TB and TB+ SB was 92.3%. There was no statistical difference in the detection rate of PCa (73.3% vs. 76.7%, P=0.275) and CsPCa (55.8% vs. 62.2%, P=0.076) between TB and TB+ SB. The missed diagnosis rate of TB for PCa was 4.5%, for CsPCa was 10.2%. For patients with PI-RADS score of 4, TB had no significant difference in the detection rate of PCa (65.4% vs. 69.2%, P=0.381) and CsPCa (46.7% vs. 52.9%, P=0.171) from TB+ SB. The accuracy of TB was 82.1%. The missed diagnosis rate of TB for PCa was 5.4%, for CsPCa was 11.8%. For patients with PI-RADS score of 5, TB had no significant difference in the detection rate of PCa (87.0% vs. 89.9%, P=0.452) and CsPCa (71.7% vs. 78.3%, P=0.211) from TB+ SB. The accuracy of TB was 73.9%. The missed diagnosis rate of TB for PCa was 3.2%, for CsPCa was 8.3%. Conclusions:For high-risk prostate cancer patients with PI-RADS score of 4-5, TB can obtain a detection effect similar to that of TB+ SB with fewer needles, but there is still the possibility of inaccurate diagnosis and missed diagnosis.
