BACKGROUND: At present, biopsy is essential for the diagnosis of prostate cancer (PCa) before radical prostatectomy (RP). However, with the development of prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PSMA PET/CT) and multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI), it might be feasible to avoid biopsy before RP. Herein, we aimed to explore the feasibility of avoiding biopsy before RP in patients highly suspected of having PCa after assessment of PSMA PET/CT and mpMRI. METHODS: Between December 2017 and April 2022, 56 patients with maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax) of ≥4 and Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) ≥4 lesions who received RP without preoperative biopsy were enrolled from two tertiary hospitals. The consistency between clinical and pathological diagnoses was evaluated. Preoperative characteristics were compared among patients with different pathological types, T stages, International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) grades, and European Association of Urology (EAU) risk groups. RESULTS: Fifty-five (98%) patients were confirmed with PCa by pathology, including 49 (89%) with clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa, defined as ISUP grade ≥2 malignancy). One patient was diagnosed with high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (HGPIN). CsPCa patients, compared with clinically insignificant prostate cancer (cisPCa) and HGPIN patients, were associated with a higher level of prostate-specific antigen (22.9 ng/mL vs . 10.0 ng/mL, P = 0.032), a lower median prostate volume (32.2 mL vs . 65.0 mL, P = 0.001), and a higher median SUVmax (13.3 vs . 5.6, P <0.001). CONCLUSIONS It might be feasible to avoid biopsy before RP for patients with a high probability of PCa based on PSMA PET/CT and mpMRI. However, the diagnostic efficacy of csPCa with PI-RADS ≥4 and SUVmax of ≥4 is inadequate for performing a procedure such as RP. Further prospective multicenter studies with larger sample sizes are necessary to confirm our perspectives and establish predictive models with PSMA PET/CT and mpMRI.
Humans ; Male ; Prostatectomy/methods* ; Prostatic Neoplasms/diagnosis* ; Middle Aged ; Aged ; Positron Emission Tomography Computed Tomography/methods* ; Biopsy ; Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging ; Prostate-Specific Antigen/metabolism*

BACKGROUND: The primary limitation to kidney transplantation is organ shortage. Recent progress in gene editing and immunosuppressive regimens has made xenotransplantation with porcine organs a possibility. However, evidence in pig-to-human xenotransplantation remains scarce, and antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) is a major obstacle to clinical applications of xenotransplantation. METHODS: We conducted a kidney xenotransplantation in a brain-dead human recipient using a porcine kidney with five gene edits (5GE) on March 25, 2024 at Xijing Hospital, China. Clinical-grade immunosuppressive regimens were employed, and the observation period lasted 22 days. We collected and analyzed the xenograft function, ultrasound findings, sequential protocol biopsies, and immune surveillance of the recipient during the observation. RESULTS: The combination of 5GE in the porcine kidney and clinical-grade immunosuppressive regimens prevented hyperacute rejection. The xenograft kidney underwent delayed graft function in the first week, but urine output increased later and the single xenograft kidney maintained electrolyte and pH homeostasis from postoperative day (POD) 12 to 19. We observed AMR at 24 h post-transplantation, due to the presence of pre-existing anti-porcine antibodies and cytotoxicity before transplantation; this AMR persisted throughout the observation period. Plasma exchange and intravenous immunoglobulin treatment mitigated the AMR. We observed activation of latent porcine cytomegalovirus toward the end of the study, which might have contributed to coagulation disorder in the recipient. CONCLUSIONS 5GE and clinical-grade immunosuppressive regimens were sufficient to prevent hyperacute rejection during pig-to-human kidney xenotransplantation. Pre-existing anti-porcine antibodies predisposed the xenograft to AMR. Plasma exchange and intravenous immunoglobulin were safe and effective in the treatment of AMR after kidney xenotransplantation.
Transplantation, Heterologous/methods* ; Kidney Transplantation/methods* ; Heterografts/pathology* ; Immunoglobulins, Intravenous/administration & dosage* ; Graft Survival/immunology* ; Humans ; Animals ; Sus scrofa ; Graft Rejection/prevention & control* ; Kidney/pathology* ; Gene Editing ; Species Specificity ; Immunosuppression Therapy/methods* ; Plasma Exchange ; Brain Death ; Biopsy ; Male ; Aged

The choice of biopsy method is critical in diagnosing prostate cancer (PCa). This retrospective cohort study compared systematic biopsy (SB) or cognitive fusion-targeted biopsy combined with SB (CB) in detecting PCa and clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa). Data from 2572 men who underwent either SB or CB in Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center (Shanghai, China) between January 2019 and December 2023 were analyzed. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to balance baseline characteristics, and detection rates were compared before and after PSM. Subgroup analyses based on prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels and Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) scores were performed. Primary and secondary outcomes were the detection rates of PCa and csPCa, respectively. Of 2572 men, 1778 were included in the PSM analysis. Before PSM, CB had higher detection rates for both PCa (62.9% vs 52.4%, odds ratio [OR]: 1.54, P < 0.001) and csPCa (54.9% vs 43.3%, OR: 1.60, P < 0.001) compared to SB. After PSM, CB remained superior in detecting PCa (63.1% vs 47.9%, OR: 1.86, P < 0.001) and csPCa (55.0% vs 38.2%, OR: 1.98, P < 0.001). In patients with PSA 4-12 ng ml -1 (>4 ng ml -1 and ≤12 ng ml -1 , which is also applicable to the following text), CB detected more PCa (59.8% vs 40.7%, OR: 2.17, P < 0.001) and csPCa (48.1% vs 27.7%, OR: 2.42, P < 0.001). CB also showed superior csPCa detection in those with PI-RADS 3 lesions (32.1% vs 18.0%, OR: 2.15, P = 0.038). Overall, CB significantly improves PCa and csPCa detection, especially in patients with PSA 4-12 ng ml -1 or PI-RADS 3 lesions.
Humans ; Male ; Prostatic Neoplasms/diagnosis* ; Propensity Score ; Retrospective Studies ; Middle Aged ; Aged ; Image-Guided Biopsy/methods* ; Prostate-Specific Antigen/blood* ; Prostate/diagnostic imaging*

OBJECTIVES: In recent years, the incidence and detection rate of pancreatic cystic lesions (PCLs) have increased significantly. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) plays an indispensable role in the diagnosis and differential diagnosis of PCLs. However, evidence comparing the diagnostic performance of EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) and fine-needle biopsy (FNB) remains limited. This study aims to compare the diagnostic yield, adequacy of tissue acquisition, and safety between EUS-FNA and EUS-FNB in evaluating PCLs to inform clinical practice. METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted on patients with PCLs who underwent either EUS-FNA or EUS-FNB between January 2014 and August 2021. The diagnostic yield, tissue acquisition adequacy, and incidence of adverse events were compared between the 2 groups. RESULTS: A total of 90 patients with PCLs were included (52 in the FNA group and 38 in the FNB group). The diagnostic yield was similar between the FNA and FNB groups (94.2% vs 94.7%, P>0.05). The adequacy of tissue acquisition was 71.2% in the FNA group and 81.6% in the FNB group (P>0.05). No statistically significant difference was observed in the incidence of adverse events between the 2 groups (P>0.05). CONCLUSIONS Both EUS-FNA and EUS-FNB demonstrate equally high diagnostic yields and tissue adequacy in PCLs, with excellent safety profiles. Both methods are safe and effective diagnostic tools for evaluating PCLs.
Humans ; Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration/adverse effects* ; Retrospective Studies ; Female ; Male ; Pancreatic Cyst/diagnostic imaging* ; Middle Aged ; Biopsy, Fine-Needle/adverse effects* ; Aged ; Pancreatic Neoplasms/diagnosis* ; Adult ; Endosonography/methods* ; Pancreas/pathology* ; Diagnosis, Differential

In this nonsystematic review of the literature, we explored the changing landscape of detection and treatment of low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer (PCa). Through emphasizing improved cancer assessment with histology classification and genomics, we investigated key developments in PCa detection and risk stratification. The pivotal role of prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in the novel diagnostic pathway is examined, alongside the benefits and drawbacks of MRI-targeted biopsies for detection and tumor characterization. We also delved into treatment options, particularly active surveillance for intermediate-risk PCa. Outcomes are compared between intermediate- and low-risk patients, offering insights into tailored management. Surgical techniques, including Retzius-sparing surgery, precision prostatectomy, and partial prostatectomy for anterior cancer, are appraised. Each technique has the potential to enhance outcomes and minimize complications. Advancements in technology and radiobiology, including computed tomography (CT)/MRI imaging and positron emission tomography (PET) fusion, allow for precise dose adjustment and daily target monitoring with imaging-guided radiotherapy, opening new ways of tailoring patients' treatments. Finally, experimental therapeutic approaches such as focal therapy open new treatment frontiers, although they create new needs in tumor identification and tracking during and after the procedure.
Humans ; Prostatic Neoplasms/pathology* ; Male ; Magnetic Resonance Imaging ; Prostatectomy/methods* ; Risk Assessment ; Watchful Waiting ; Prostate/diagnostic imaging* ; Image-Guided Biopsy/methods*

Pathological results are a gold standard for the diagnosis of prostate cancer (PCa), one of the ways to obtain the pathological tissue is prostate biopsy. With the advances in detection technology, biochemical examination and medical imaging have greatly improved the detection rate of PCa. However, the final therapeutic option depends on pathological results, and therefore the precision of prostate biopsy and puncturing technique is highly required. Specific requirements include pinpoint positioning of the lesion and exact sampling of the positive tissue to reduce pain caused by unnecessary invalid punctures, accurate navigation for deep lesions to avoid damage to the urethra and bladder and reduce bleeding and other complications. Current development of medical imaging and artificial intelligence has significantly promoted biopsy puncture techniques. This review updates the application of image fusion and robotics in prostate biopsy.
Humans ; Male ; Prostatic Neoplasms/pathology* ; Prostate/pathology* ; Image-Guided Biopsy/methods* ; Punctures/methods* ; Biopsy, Needle/methods* ; Robotics

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 investigate the diagnostic efficacy of targeted biopsy (TBx), systematic biopsy (SBx), TBx+6-core SBx in prostate cancer (PCa) / clinically significant prostate cancer (cs-PCa) for patients with prostate imaging reporting and data system (PI-RADS) score of 5, and thereby to explore an optimal sampling scheme. METHODS: The data of 585 patients who underwent multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) with at least one lesion of PI-RADS score 5 at Peking University First Hospital from January 2019 to June 2022 were retrospectively analyzed. All patients underwent mpMRI / transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) cognitive guided biopsy (TBx+SBx). With the pathological results of combined biopsy as the gold standard, we compared the diagnostic efficacy of TBx only, SBx only, and TBx+6-core SBx for PCa/csPCa. The patients were grouped according to mpMRI T-stage (cT2, cT3, cT4) and the detection rates of different biopsy schemes for PCa/csPCa were compared using Cochran's Q and McNemar tests. RESULTS: Among 585 patients with a PI-RADS score of 5, 560 (95.7%) were positive and 25(4.3%) were negative via TBx+SBx. After stratified according to mpMRI T-stage, 233 patients (39.8%) were found in cT2 stage, 214 patients (36.6%) in cT3 stage, and 138 patients (23.6%) in cT4 stage. There was no statistically significant difference in the detection rate of PCa/csPCa between TBx+6-core SBx and TBx+SBx (all P>0.999). Also, there was no statistically significant difference in the detection rate of PCa/csPCa between TBx and TBx+SBx in the cT2, cT3, and cT4 subgroups (PCa: P=0.203, P=0.250, P>0.999; csPCa: P=0.700, P=0.250, P>0.999). The missed diagnosis rate of SBx for PCa and csPCa was 2.1% (12/560) and 1.8% (10/549), and that of TBx for PCa and csPCa was 1.8% (10/560) and 1.4% (8/549), respectively. However, the detection rate of TBx+6-core SBx for PCa and csPCa was 100%. Compared with TBx+SBx, TBx and TBx+6-core SBx had a fewer number of cores and a higher detection rate per core (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION For patients with a PI-RADS score of 5, TBx and TBx+6-core SBx showed the same PCa/csPCa detection rates and a high detection rates per core as that of TBx+SBx, which can be considered as an optimal scheme for prostate biopsy.
Male ; Humans ; Prostatic Neoplasms/pathology* ; Magnetic Resonance Imaging/methods* ; Retrospective Studies ; Prostate/diagnostic imaging* ; Image-Guided Biopsy/methods*

BACKGROUND: Rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE) is a technique used for simultaneous evaluation of biopsy specimens through rapid cytology staining. Diff-Quik (DQ) staining is the most commonly employed method for cytological rapid on-site evaluation (C-ROSE). However, the utilization of DQ staining for on-site cytological interpretation remains uncommon among pathologists in China, posing challenges to the implementation of C-ROSE. This study aims to assess the application of rapid hematoxylin-eosin (HE) staining and DQ staining for C-ROSE during percutaneous needle biopsy of peripheral lung cancer and evaluate the value of rapid HE staining in C-ROSE. METHODS: Computed tomography (CT)-guided lung biopsies were conducted on 300 patients diagnosed with peripheral lung cancer. The patients were randomly assigned to two groups for C-ROSE using either rapid HE staining or DQ staining, and subsequently the two methods were compared and evaluated. RESULTS: The concordance rate between C-ROSE and histopathological diagnosis was 96.7%. The median staining time for rapid HE staining was 160 s, while that for DQ staining was 120 s, representing a significant difference between the two groups (P<0.001). However, there were no significant differences observed in terms of total biopsy time, concordance rate with histopathology, cytology specimen peeling rate, and incidence of serious adverse reactions between the two groups (P>0.05). CONCLUSIONS Both staining methods comply with C-ROSE criteria in the biopsy setting of peripheral lung cancer. Rapid HE staining is more aligned with domestic clinical requirements and holds potential for further promotion and adoption in C-ROSE.
Humans ; Lung Neoplasms/pathology* ; Eosine Yellowish-(YS) ; Rapid On-site Evaluation ; Biopsy, Needle/methods* ; Staining and Labeling

Sentinel lymph nodes (SLNs) are the first station of lymph nodes that extend from the breast tumor to the axillary lymphatic drainage. The pathological status of these LNs can predict that of the entire axillary lymph node. Therefore, the accurate identification of SLNs is necessary for sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) to replace axillary lymph node dissection (ALND). The quality of life and prognosis of breast cancer patients are related to proper surgical treatment after the precise identification of SLNs. Some of the SLN tracers that have been identified include radioisotope, nano-carbon, indocyanine green (ICG), and methylene blue (MB). However, these tracers have certain limitations, such as pigmentation, radiation dangers, and the requirement for costly detection equipment. Ultrasound contrast agents (UCAs) have good specificity and sensitivity, and thus can compensate for some shortcomings of the mentioned tracers. This technique is also being applied to SLNB in patients with breast cancer, and can even provide an initial judgment on SLN status. Contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) has the advantages of high distinguishability, simple operation, no radiation harm, low cost, and accurate localization; therefore, it is expected to replace the traditional biopsy methods. In addition, it can significantly enhance the accuracy of SLN localization and shorten the operation time.
Humans ; Female ; Sentinel Lymph Node/pathology* ; Breast Neoplasms/pathology* ; Quality of Life ; Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy/methods* ; Ultrasonography/methods* ; Lymph Nodes/surgery*