Biopsy, Fine-Needle ; methods ; Female ; Humans ; Image-Guided Biopsy ; Male ; Specialties, Surgical ; Thyroid Nodule ; pathology

BACKGROUNDEndobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration (EBUS-TBNA) is an effective technique used to precisely detect enlarged mediastinal lymph nodes. The efficacy of EBUS-TBNA versus standard modalities for the diagnosis of sarcoidosis remains to be elucidated. In this meta-analysis, we compared the efficacies of these methods.

METHODSWe searched PubMed, Embase, The Cochrane Library, Wanfang, Cpvip, CNKI, and the bibliographies of the relevant references. We analyzed the data obtained with Revman 5.2 (Nordic Cochrane Center, Copenhagen, Denmark) and Stata 12.0 software (Stata Corporation, College Station, TX, USA). The Mantel-Haenszel method was used to calculate the pooled odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTSSixteen studies with a total of 1823 participants met the inclusion criteria, and data were extracted regarding the diagnostic yield of each approach. The ORs for EBUS-TBNA versus transbronchial lung biopsy (TBLB) for the diagnosis of sarcoidosis ranged from 0.26 to 126.58, and the pooled OR was 5.89 (95% CI, 2.20-15.79, P = 0.0004). These findings indicated that EBUS-TBNA provided a much higher diagnostic yield than TBLB. The pooled OR for EBUS-TBNA + TBLB + endobronchial biopsy (EBB) versus TBNA + TBLB + EBB was 1.54 (95% CI, 0.61-3.93, P = 0.36), implying that there was no significant difference between their diagnostic yields. However, clinical heterogeneity was reflected in the nature of the studies and in the operative variables.

CONCLUSIONSThe results of this meta-analysis suggest that EBUS-TBNA + TBLB + EBB could be used for the diagnosis of sarcoidosis, if available. At medical centers without EBUS-TBNA, TBNA + TBLB + EBB could be used instead.

Biopsy, Fine-Needle ; methods ; Bronchoscopy ; methods ; Endosonography ; methods ; Female ; Humans ; Image-Guided Biopsy ; methods ; Male ; Sarcoidosis, Pulmonary ; diagnosis ; Ultrasonography ; methods

This study aims to compare the prostate cancer detection rate between magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) cognitive fusion targeted biopsy and systematic biopsy. A total of 614 patients who underwent transrectal prostate biopsy during 2016-2018 with multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) were included. All patients with a PI-RADS V2 score ≥ 3 accepted both targeted biopsy and systematic biopsy, and those with a PI-RADS V2 score ≤ 2 only accepted systematic biopsy. Overall prostate cancer detection rate between the two biopsies was compared. MRI-TRUS cognitive fusion targeted biopsy identified 342 cases (75.7%) of prostate cancer while systematic biopsy identified 358 cases (79.2%). There was no significant difference in the detection rate between the two groups ( = 1.621, = 0.203). Targeted biopsy had significant fewer biopsy cores compared with systematic biopsy, reducing (9.3 ± 0.11) cores ( < 0.001) in average. Targeted biopsy had about 10.8% ( < 0.001) more tumor tissues in positive cores compared with systematic biopsy. The results show that both MRI-TRUS cognitive fusion targeted biopsy and systematic biopsy have good detection rate on prostate cancer. Cognitive targeted biopsy may reduce biopsy cores and provide more tumor tissues in positive cores.
Biopsy ; methods ; Humans ; Image-Guided Biopsy ; Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Interventional ; Male ; Prospective Studies ; Prostatic Neoplasms ; diagnostic imaging ; Ultrasonography, Interventional

Prostate biopsy is the gold standard for the diagnosis of prostate cancer. In order to successfully and effectively complete the biopsy, clinicians should not only select the correct puncture method, but also pay attention to the pain control of patients undergoing puncture. It is necessary to select a reasonable anesthetic method for biopsy. The pain during biopsy comes from the skin, muscle and other structures in the puncture approach, and also comes from the prostate capsule. Therefore, the anesthesia emphasis of transperineal and transrectal biopsy approaches will also be different. The use of appropriate anesthesia is of great significance to improve the patient's cooperation and ensure the success rate of biopsy. With the continuous maturity of the technology and concept of prostate biopsy, a single anesthesia method has been unable to meet the actual anesthetic needs of biopsy, and the use of multi-site and multi-phase combined anesthesia for different sources of pain has become the mainstream anesthetic option.
Anesthesia ; Anesthesia, Local ; Biopsy ; Humans ; Image-Guided Biopsy/methods* ; Male ; Pain/pathology* ; Prostate/pathology* ; Prostatic Neoplasms/pathology*

The prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test contributes a lot to the diagnosis and treatment of prostate cancer (PCa) and, along with imaging-guided prostate biopsy, has improved the diagnosis rate of lower-risk PCa and the accuracy of its clinical staging. However, many questions and controversies remain as to the choice of optimal biopsy strategies. Scholars differ in views about how to utilize PCa-related biomarkers to optimize the detection of initial and repeat biopsies. This review focuses on the present status of and advances in transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy for PCa.
Humans ; Image-Guided Biopsy ; methods ; Male ; Prostate ; pathology ; Prostate-Specific Antigen ; blood ; Prostatic Neoplasms ; pathology ; Ultrasonography, Interventional ; methods

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-targeted prostate biopsy is the recommended investigation in men with suspicious lesion(s) on MRI. The role of concurrent systematic in addition to targeted biopsies is currently unclear. Using our prospectively maintained database, we identified men with at least one Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) ≥3 lesion who underwent targeted and/or systematic biopsies from May 2016 to May 2020. Clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) was defined as any Gleason grade group ≥2 cancer. Of 545 patients who underwent MRI fusion-targeted biopsy, 222 (40.7%) were biopsy naïve, 247 (45.3%) had previous prostate biopsy(s), and 76 (13.9%) had known prostate cancer undergoing active surveillance. Prostate cancer was more commonly found in biopsy-naïve men (63.5%) and those on active surveillance (68.4%) compared to those who had previous biopsies (35.2%; both P < 0.001). Systematic biopsies provided an incremental 10.4% detection of csPCa among biopsy-naïve patients, versus an incremental 2.4% among those who had prior negative biopsies. Multivariable regression found age (odds ratio [OR] = 1.03, P = 0.03), prostate-specific antigen (PSA) density ≥0.15 ng ml^-2 (OR = 3.24, P < 0.001), prostate health index (PHI) ≥35 (OR = 2.43, P = 0.006), higher PI-RADS score (vs PI-RADS 3; OR = 4.59 for PI-RADS 4, and OR = 9.91 for PI-RADS 5; both P < 0.001) and target lesion volume-to-prostate volume ratio ≥0.10 (OR = 5.26, P = 0.013) were significantly associated with csPCa detection on targeted biopsy. In conclusion, for men undergoing MRI fusion-targeted prostate biopsies, systematic biopsies should not be omitted given its incremental value to targeted biopsies alone. The factors such as PSA density ≥0.15 ng ml^-2, PHI ≥35, higher PI-RADS score, and target lesion volume-to-prostate volume ratio ≥0.10 can help identify men at higher risk of csPCa.
Male ; Humans ; Prostate/pathology* ; Prostatic Neoplasms/pathology* ; Prostate-Specific Antigen ; Magnetic Resonance Imaging/methods* ; Image-Guided Biopsy/methods* ; Retrospective Studies

The Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) has good ability to identify the nature of lesions on prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). However, some lesions are still reported as PI-RADS 4 and 5 but are biopsy-proven benign. Herein, we aimed to summarize the reasons for the negative prostate biopsy of patients who were assessed as PI-RADS 4 and 5 by biparameter MRI. We retrospectively sorted out the prostate MRI, treatment, and follow-up results of patients who underwent a biparameter MRI examination of the prostate in The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University (Nanjing, China) from August 2019 to June 2021 with PI-RADS 4 and 5 but a negative biopsy. We focused on reviewing the MRI characteristics. A total of 467 patients underwent transperineal prostate biopsy. Among them, biopsy pathology of 93 cases were negative. After follow-up, 90 patients were ruled out of prostate cancer. Among the 90 cases, 40 were considered to be overestimated PI-RADS after review. A total of 22 cases were transition zone (TZ) lesions with regular appearance and clear boundaries, and 3 cases were symmetrical lesions. Among 15 cases, the TZ nodules penetrated the peripheral zone (PZ) and were mistaken for the origin of PZ. A total of 17 cases of lesions were difficult to distinguish from prostate cancer. Among them, 5 cases were granulomatous inflammation (1 case of prostate tuberculosis). A total of 33 cases were ambiguous lesions, whose performance was between PI-RADS 3 and 4. In summary, the reasons for "false-positive MRI diagnosis" included PI-RADS overestimation, ambiguous images giving higher PI-RADS, diseases that were really difficult to distinguish, and missed lesion in the initial biopsy; and the first two accounted for the most.
Male ; Humans ; Prostatic Neoplasms/pathology* ; Magnetic Resonance Imaging/methods* ; Retrospective Studies ; Image-Guided Biopsy/methods* ; Prostate/pathology*

The purpose of this study was to explore transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) findings of prostate cancer (PCa) guided by multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) and to improve the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) system for avoiding unnecessary mpMRI-guided targeted biopsy (TB). From January 2018 to October 2019, fusion mpMRI and TRUS-guided biopsies were performed in 162 consecutive patients. The study included 188 suspicious lesions on mpMRI in 156 patients, all of whom underwent mpMRI-TRUS fusion imaging-guided TB and 12-core transperineal systematic biopsy (SB). Univariate analyses were performed to investigate the relationship between TRUS features and PCa. Then, logistic regression analysis with generalized estimating equations was performed to determine the independent predictors of PCa and obtain the fitted probability of PCa. The detection rates of PCa based on TB alone, SB alone, and combined SB and TB were 55.9% (105 of 188), 52.6% (82 of 156), and 62.8% (98 of 156), respectively. The significant predictors of PCa on TRUS were hypoechogenicity (odds ratio [OR]: 9.595, P = 0.002), taller-than-wide shape (OR: 3.539, P = 0.022), asymmetric vascular structures (OR: 3.728, P = 0.031), close proximity to capsule (OR: 3.473, P = 0.040), and irregular margins (OR: 3.843, P = 0.041). We propose subgrouping PI-RADS score 3 into categories 3a, 3b, 3c, and 3d based on different numbers of TRUS predictors, as the creation of PI-RADS 3a (no suspicious ultrasound features) could avoid 16.7% of mpMRI-guided TBs. Risk stratification of PCa with mpMRI-TRUS fusion imaging-directed ultrasound features could avoid unnecessary mpMRI-TBs.
Male ; Humans ; Prostatic Neoplasms/pathology* ; Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging ; Magnetic Resonance Imaging/methods* ; Prostate/pathology* ; Image-Guided Biopsy/methods*

Objective: To analyze the relationship between Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) scores and the pathological results of transperineal magnetic resonance-ultrasound fusion guided biopsy. Methods: The clinical data, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) results and prostate puncture biopsies of 517 patients who were assigned to PI-RADS score of 4 or 5 and underwent transperineal magnetic resonance-ultrasound fusion guided biopsy at The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University from June 2019 to March 2022 were retrospectively analyzed. Patients were divided into the PI-RADS 4 and PI-RADS 5 groups according to their PI-RADS scores and were stratified by their prostate specific antigen (PSA) values (PSA<10 ng/ml vs. PSA 10-20 ng/ml). The pathological negative rates from the biopsy, the distribution of the grade groups according to the grading system by World Health Organization/International Society of Urological Pathology (WHO/ISUP), the detection rates of prostate cancer (PCa) and clinically significant prostate cancer (CsPCa)between the groups were compared. Results: 369 patients with a PI-RADS score of 4 and 148 patients with a PI-RADS score of 5 were included in our research. The overall detection rates of PCa and CsPCa were 77.8% (402/517) and 66.7% (345/517), respectively. In the PI-RADS 4 group, patients with prostate negative biopsies or in WHO/ISUP 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5 grade groups accounted for 28.2%, 12.7%, 20.1%, 17.1%, 18.4% and 3.5%, respectively, whereas in the PI-RADS 5 group the rates were 7.4%, 6.8%, 22.3%, 22.3%, 26.4%, and 14.9%, respectively. The difference was statistically significant (P<0.001). The detection rates of PCa and CsPCa in the PI-RADS 4 group [71.8% (265/369) vs. 59.1% (218/369), P<0.001] were lower than those of the PI-RADS 5 group [92.6% (137/148) vs. 85.8% (127/148), P<0.001]. In the PI-RADS 4 group, the proportion of patients classified into WHO/ISUP 4-5 grade groups was lower than that of patients in the PI-RADS 5 group [22.0% (81/369) vs 41.2% (61/148) (P<0.001)]. The detection rates of PCa and CsPCa in the PSA<10 ng/ml stratification were less than that in the PSA 10-20 ng/ml stratification[74.1% (281/379) vs. 87.7% (121/138), P=0.001], and [60.9% (231/379) vs. 82.6% (114/138), P<0.001]. For patients with PSA<10 ng/ml, the detection rates of PCa and CsPCa in the PI-RADS 4 group were less than those in the PI-RADS5 group [70.9% (217/306) vs. 87.7% (64/73), P=0.003], and [56.2% (172/306) vs. 80.8% (59/73), P<0.001]. For those with a PSA value of 10-20 ng/ml, the detection rates of PCa and CsPCa in the PI-RADS 4 group were less than those in the PI-RADS 5 group [76.2% (48/63) vs. 97.3% (73/75), P<0.001], and [73.0% (46/63) vs. 90.7% (68/75), P=0.006]. There were statistically significant differences in the proportions of patients with prostate negative biopsy and those falling into WHO/ISUP grade groups 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5 (P<0.001) between the PI-RADS 4 group and the PI-RADS 5 group in both stratifications. Conclusions: In this study, the detection rates of CsPCa and PCa in the PI-RADS 4 group were less than those in the PI-RADS 5 group. With the increase of PI-RADS scores, the detection rate of high-grade PCa increased. The same results held for patients with PSA<10 ng/ml or with PSA 10-20 ng/ml.
Male ; Humans ; Prostatic Neoplasms/pathology* ; Prostate-Specific Antigen/analysis* ; Magnetic Resonance Imaging/methods* ; Retrospective Studies ; Image-Guided Biopsy/methods*

Objective: To analyze the relationship between Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) scores and the pathological results of transperineal magnetic resonance-ultrasound fusion guided biopsy. Methods: The clinical data, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) results and prostate puncture biopsies of 517 patients who were assigned to PI-RADS score of 4 or 5 and underwent transperineal magnetic resonance-ultrasound fusion guided biopsy at The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University from June 2019 to March 2022 were retrospectively analyzed. Patients were divided into the PI-RADS 4 and PI-RADS 5 groups according to their PI-RADS scores and were stratified by their prostate specific antigen (PSA) values (PSA<10 ng/ml vs. PSA 10-20 ng/ml). The pathological negative rates from the biopsy, the distribution of the grade groups according to the grading system by World Health Organization/International Society of Urological Pathology (WHO/ISUP), the detection rates of prostate cancer (PCa) and clinically significant prostate cancer (CsPCa)between the groups were compared. Results: 369 patients with a PI-RADS score of 4 and 148 patients with a PI-RADS score of 5 were included in our research. The overall detection rates of PCa and CsPCa were 77.8% (402/517) and 66.7% (345/517), respectively. In the PI-RADS 4 group, patients with prostate negative biopsies or in WHO/ISUP 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5 grade groups accounted for 28.2%, 12.7%, 20.1%, 17.1%, 18.4% and 3.5%, respectively, whereas in the PI-RADS 5 group the rates were 7.4%, 6.8%, 22.3%, 22.3%, 26.4%, and 14.9%, respectively. The difference was statistically significant (P<0.001). The detection rates of PCa and CsPCa in the PI-RADS 4 group [71.8% (265/369) vs. 59.1% (218/369), P<0.001] were lower than those of the PI-RADS 5 group [92.6% (137/148) vs. 85.8% (127/148), P<0.001]. In the PI-RADS 4 group, the proportion of patients classified into WHO/ISUP 4-5 grade groups was lower than that of patients in the PI-RADS 5 group [22.0% (81/369) vs 41.2% (61/148) (P<0.001)]. The detection rates of PCa and CsPCa in the PSA<10 ng/ml stratification were less than that in the PSA 10-20 ng/ml stratification[74.1% (281/379) vs. 87.7% (121/138), P=0.001], and [60.9% (231/379) vs. 82.6% (114/138), P<0.001]. For patients with PSA<10 ng/ml, the detection rates of PCa and CsPCa in the PI-RADS 4 group were less than those in the PI-RADS5 group [70.9% (217/306) vs. 87.7% (64/73), P=0.003], and [56.2% (172/306) vs. 80.8% (59/73), P<0.001]. For those with a PSA value of 10-20 ng/ml, the detection rates of PCa and CsPCa in the PI-RADS 4 group were less than those in the PI-RADS 5 group [76.2% (48/63) vs. 97.3% (73/75), P<0.001], and [73.0% (46/63) vs. 90.7% (68/75), P=0.006]. There were statistically significant differences in the proportions of patients with prostate negative biopsy and those falling into WHO/ISUP grade groups 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5 (P<0.001) between the PI-RADS 4 group and the PI-RADS 5 group in both stratifications. Conclusions: In this study, the detection rates of CsPCa and PCa in the PI-RADS 4 group were less than those in the PI-RADS 5 group. With the increase of PI-RADS scores, the detection rate of high-grade PCa increased. The same results held for patients with PSA<10 ng/ml or with PSA 10-20 ng/ml.
Male ; Humans ; Prostatic Neoplasms/pathology* ; Prostate-Specific Antigen/analysis* ; Magnetic Resonance Imaging/methods* ; Retrospective Studies ; Image-Guided Biopsy/methods*