Search Results Heading

MBRLSearchResults

mbrl.module.common.modules.added.book.to.shelf
Title added to your shelf!
View what I already have on My Shelf.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to add the title to your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to remove the title from your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
    Done
    Filters
    Reset
  • Discipline
      Discipline
      Clear All
      Discipline
  • Is Peer Reviewed
      Is Peer Reviewed
      Clear All
      Is Peer Reviewed
  • Item Type
      Item Type
      Clear All
      Item Type
  • Subject
      Subject
      Clear All
      Subject
  • Year
      Year
      Clear All
      From:
      -
      To:
  • More Filters
      More Filters
      Clear All
      More Filters
      Source
    • Language
1,190 result(s) for "Image-Guided Biopsy - methods"
Sort by:
Diagnostic accuracy of multi-parametric MRI and TRUS biopsy in prostate cancer (PROMIS): a paired validating confirmatory study
Men with high serum prostate specific antigen usually undergo transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy (TRUS-biopsy). TRUS-biopsy can cause side-effects including bleeding, pain, and infection. Multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging (MP-MRI) used as a triage test might allow men to avoid unnecessary TRUS-biopsy and improve diagnostic accuracy. We did this multicentre, paired-cohort, confirmatory study to test diagnostic accuracy of MP-MRI and TRUS-biopsy against a reference test (template prostate mapping biopsy [TPM-biopsy]). Men with prostate-specific antigen concentrations up to 15 ng/mL, with no previous biopsy, underwent 1·5 Tesla MP-MRI followed by both TRUS-biopsy and TPM-biopsy. The conduct and reporting of each test was done blind to other test results. Clinically significant cancer was defined as Gleason score ≥4 + 3 or a maximum cancer core length 6 mm or longer. This study is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01292291. Between May 17, 2012, and November 9, 2015, we enrolled 740 men, 576 of whom underwent 1·5 Tesla MP-MRI followed by both TRUS-biopsy and TPM-biopsy. On TPM-biopsy, 408 (71%) of 576 men had cancer with 230 (40%) of 576 patients clinically significant. For clinically significant cancer, MP-MRI was more sensitive (93%, 95% CI 88–96%) than TRUS-biopsy (48%, 42–55%; p<0·0001) and less specific (41%, 36–46% for MP-MRI vs 96%, 94–98% for TRUS-biopsy; p<0·0001). 44 (5·9%) of 740 patients reported serious adverse events, including 8 cases of sepsis. Using MP-MRI to triage men might allow 27% of patients avoid a primary biopsy and diagnosis of 5% fewer clinically insignificant cancers. If subsequent TRUS-biopsies were directed by MP-MRI findings, up to 18% more cases of clinically significant cancer might be detected compared with the standard pathway of TRUS-biopsy for all. MP-MRI, used as a triage test before first prostate biopsy, could reduce unnecessary biopsies by a quarter. MP-MRI can also reduce over-diagnosis of clinically insignificant prostate cancer and improve detection of clinically significant cancer. PROMIS is funded by the UK Government Department of Health, National Institute of Health Research–Health Technology Assessment Programme, (Project number 09/22/67). This project is also supported and partly funded by UCLH/UCL Biomedical Research Centre and The Royal Marsden and Institute for Cancer Research Biomedical Research Centre and is coordinated by the Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Unit (MRC CTU) at UCL. It is sponsored by University College London (UCL).
Navigational Bronchoscopy or Transthoracic Needle Biopsy for Lung Nodules
Each year, millions of pulmonary nodules are identified incidentally or through lung cancer screening, and many involve biopsy to distinguish cancer from benign processes. Both navigational bronchoscopy and computed tomography-guided transthoracic needle biopsy are commonly used in patients undergoing biopsies of peripheral pulmonary nodules, but the relative diagnostic accuracy of these two approaches is unclear. In this multicenter, randomized, parallel-group, noninferiority trial, we assigned patients with an intermediate-risk or high-risk peripheral pulmonary nodule measuring 10 to 30 mm in diameter to undergo navigational bronchoscopy or transthoracic needle biopsy at seven centers across the United States. The primary outcome was diagnostic accuracy, which was defined as the percentage of patients with biopsies that showed a specific diagnosis (cancer or a specific benign condition) that was confirmed to be accurate through 12 months of clinical follow-up (nonferiority margin, 10 percentage points). Secondary outcomes included procedural complications such as the occurrence of pneumothorax. Among the 234 patients included in the primary-outcome analysis (5 of whom were lost to follow-up), biopsy resulted in a specific diagnosis that was confirmed to be accurate through month 12 in 94 of 119 patients (79.0%) in the navigational bronchoscopy group and in 81 of 110 patients (73.6%) in the transthoracic needle biopsy group (absolute difference, 5.4 percentage points; 95% confidence interval, -6.5 to 17.2; P = 0.003 for noninferiority; P = 0.17 for superiority). Pneumothorax occurred in 4 of 121 patients (3.3%) in the navigational bronchoscopy group and in 32 of 113 patients (28.3%) in the transthoracic needle biopsy group and led to the placement of a chest tube, hospital admission, or both in 1 patient (0.8%) and 13 patients (11.5%), respectively. The diagnostic accuracy of navigational bronchoscopy was noninferior to that of transthoracic needle biopsy among patients with peripheral pulmonary nodules measuring 10 to 30 mm. (Funded by Medtronic and others; VERITAS ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04250194.).
Local anaesthetic transperineal biopsy versus transrectal prostate biopsy in prostate cancer detection (TRANSLATE): a multicentre, randomised, controlled trial
Prostate cancer diagnosis requires biopsy, traditionally performed under local anaesthetic with ultrasound guidance via a transrectal approach (TRUS). Local anaesthetic ultrasound-guided transperineal biopsy (LATP) is gaining popularity in this setting; however, there is uncertainty regarding prostate sampling, infection rates, tolerability, side-effects, and cost-effectiveness. TRANSLATE was a randomised clinical trial that aimed to compare detection of Gleason Grade Group (GGG) 2 or higher prostate cancer, side-effects, tolerability, and patient-reported outcomes, after LATP versus TRUS biopsy. In this randomised clinical trial which was done at ten hospitals in the UK, patients aged 18 years or older were eligible if investigated for suspected prostate cancer based on elevated age-specific prostate-specific antigen or abnormal digital rectal examination, and if biopsy-naive having received pre-biopsy MRI on a 1·5 or higher Tesla scanner. Individuals were excluded if they had any previous prostate biopsy, extensive local disease easily detectable by any biopsy (prostate-specific antigen >50 ng/mL or entire gland replaced by tumour on MRI), symptoms of concurrent or recent urinary tract infection, history of immunocompromise, need for enhanced antibiotic prophylaxis, absent rectum, or inability to position in lithotomy. Participants were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive LATP or TRUS biopsy, using web-based software with a randomisation sequence using a minimisation algorithm to ensure balanced allocation across biopsy groups for minimisation factors (recruitment site, and location of the MRI lesion). The primary outcome was detection of GGG 2 or higher prostate cancer, analysed in the modified intention-to-treat population (all randomly assigned to treatment who had a biopsy result available). Key secondary endpoints assessing post-biopsy adverse events were infection, bleeding, urinary and sexual function, tolerability, and patient-reported outcomes. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05179694) and at ISRCTN (ISRCTN98159689), and is complete. Between Dec 3, 2021, and Sept 26, 2023, 2078 (76%) of 2727 assessed individuals were eligible, and 1126 (41%) of 2727 agreed to participate. 1044 (93%) of the 1126 participants were White British. Participants were allocated to TRUS (n=564) or LATP (n=562) biopsy, and were followed up at time of biopsy, and at 7 days, 35 days, and 4 months post-biopsy. We found GGG 2 or higher prostate cancer in 329 (60%) of 547 participants with biopsy results randomly assigned to LATP compared with 294 (54%) of 540 participants with biopsy results randomly assigned to TRUS biopsy (odds ratio [OR] 1·32 [95% CI 1·03–1·70]; p=0·031). Infection requiring admission to hospital within 35 days post-biopsy occurred in 2 (<1%) of 562 participants in the LATP group compared with 9 (2%) of 564 in the TRUS group. No statistically significant difference was observed in the reporting of overall biopsy-related complications (LATP 454 [81%] of 562 vs TRUS 436 [77%] of 564, OR 1·23 [95% CI 0·93 to 1·65]), urinary retention requiring catheterisation (LATP 35 [6%] of 562 vs TRUS 27 [5%] of 564), urinary symptoms (median International Prostate Symptom Score: LATP 8 [IQR 4–14] vs TRUS 8 [4–13], OR 0·36 [95% CI –0·38 to 1·10]), nor sexual function (median International Index of Erectile Function score: LATP 5 [2–25] vs TRUS 8 [3–24], OR –0·60 [–1·79 to 0·58]) at 4 months after biopsy. Trial participants more commonly reported LATP biopsy to be immediately painful and embarrassing compared with TRUS (LATP 216 [38%] of 562 vs TRUS 153 [27%] of 564; OR 1·84 [95% CI 1·40 to 2·43]). Serious adverse events occurred in 14 (2%) of 562 participants in the LATP group and 25 (4%) of 564 in the TRUS group. Among biopsy-naive individuals being investigated for possible prostate cancer, biopsy with LATP led to greater detection of GGG 2 or higher disease compared with TRUS. These findings will help to inform patients, clinicians, clinical guidelines, and policy makers regarding the important trade-offs between LATP and TRUS prostate biopsy. National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment.
Multiparametric ultrasound versus multiparametric MRI to diagnose prostate cancer (CADMUS): a prospective, multicentre, paired-cohort, confirmatory study
Multiparametric MRI of the prostate followed by targeted biopsy is recommended for patients at risk of prostate cancer. However, multiparametric ultrasound is more readily available than multiparametric MRI. Data from paired-cohort validation studies and randomised, controlled trials support the use of multiparametric MRI, whereas the evidence for individual ultrasound methods and multiparametric ultrasound is only derived from case series. We aimed to establish the overall agreement between multiparametric ultrasound and multiparametric MRI to diagnose clinically significant prostate cancer. We conducted a prospective, multicentre, paired-cohort, confirmatory study in seven hospitals in the UK. Patients at risk of prostate cancer, aged 18 years or older, with an elevated prostate-specific antigen concentration or abnormal findings on digital rectal examination underwent both multiparametric ultrasound and multiparametric MRI. Multiparametric ultrasound consisted of B-mode, colour Doppler, real-time elastography, and contrast-enhanced ultrasound. Multiparametric MRI included high-resolution T2-weighted images, diffusion-weighted imaging (dedicated high B 1400 s/mm2 or 2000 s/mm2 and apparent diffusion coefficient map), and dynamic contrast-enhanced axial T1-weighted images. Patients with positive findings on multiparametric ultrasound or multiparametric MRI underwent targeted biopsies but were masked to their test results. If both tests yielded positive findings, the order of targeting at biopsy was randomly assigned (1:1) using stratified (according to centre only) block randomisation with randomly varying block sizes. The co-primary endpoints were the proportion of positive lesions on, and agreement between, multiparametric MRI and multiparametric ultrasound in identifying suspicious lesions (Likert score of ≥3), and detection of clinically significant cancer (defined as a Gleason score of ≥4 + 3 in any area or a maximum cancer core length of ≥6 mm of any grade [PROMIS definition 1]) in those patients who underwent a biopsy. Adverse events were defined according to Good Clinical Practice and trial regulatory guidelines. The trial is registered on ISRCTN, 38541912, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02712684, with recruitment and follow-up completed. Between March 15, 2016, and Nov 7, 2019, 370 eligible patients were enrolled; 306 patients completed both multiparametric ultrasound and multiparametric MRI and 257 underwent a prostate biopsy. Multiparametric ultrasound was positive in 272 (89% [95% CI 85–92]) of 306 patients and multiparametric MRI was positive in 238 patients (78% [73–82]; difference 11·1% [95% CI 5·1–17·1]). Positive test agreement was 73·2% (95% CI 67·9–78·1; κ=0·06 [95% CI –0·56 to 0·17]). Any cancer was detected in 133 (52% [95% CI 45·5–58]) of 257 patients, with 83 (32% [26–38]) of 257 being clinically significant by PROMIS definition 1. Each test alone would result in multiparametric ultrasound detecting PROMIS definition 1 cancer in 66 (26% [95% CI 21–32]) of 257 patients who had biopsies and multiparametric MRI detecting it in 77 (30% [24–36]; difference –4·3% [95% CI –8·3% to –0·3]). Combining both tests detected 83 (32% [95% CI 27–38]) of 257 clinically significant cancers as per PROMIS definition 1; of these 83 cancers, six (7% [95% CI 3–15]) were detected exclusively with multiparametric ultrasound, and 17 (20% [12–31]) were exclusively detected by multiparametric MRI (agreement 91·1% [95% CI 86·9–94·2]; κ=0·78 [95% CI 0·69–0·86]). No serious adverse events were related to trial activity. Multiparametric ultrasound detected 4·3% fewer clinically significant prostate cancers than multiparametric MRI, but it would lead to 11·1% more patients being referred for a biopsy. Multiparametric ultrasound could be an alternative to multiparametric MRI as a first test for patients at risk of prostate cancer, particularly if multiparametric MRI cannot be carried out. Both imaging tests missed clinically significant cancers detected by the other, so the use of both would increase the detection of clinically significant prostate cancers compared with using each test alone. The Jon Moulton Charity Trust, Prostate Cancer UK, and UCLH Charity and Barts Charity.
Randomized Trial of Endobronchial Ultrasound–guided Transbronchial Needle Aspiration under General Anesthesia versus Moderate Sedation
Data about the influence of the type of sedation on yield, complications, and tolerance of endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration (EBUS-TBNA) are based mostly on retrospective studies and are largely inconsistent. To determine whether the type of sedation influences the diagnostic yield of EBUS-TBNA, its complication rates, and patient tolerance. Patients referred for EBUS-TBNA were randomized (1:1) to undergo this procedure under general anesthesia (GA) or moderate sedation (MS). Pathologists were blinded to group allocation. The main outcome was \"diagnostic yield,\" defined as the percentage of patients for whom EBUS-TBNA rendered a specific diagnosis. One hundred and forty-nine patients underwent EBUS-TBNA, 75 under GA and 74 under MS. Demographic and baseline clinical characteristics were well balanced. Two hundred and thirty-six lymph nodes (LNs) and six masses were sampled in the GA group (average, 3.2 ± 1.9 sites/patient), and 200 LNs and six masses in the MS group (average, 2.8 ± 1.5 sites/patient) (P = 0.199). The diagnostic yield was 70.7% (53 of 75) and 68.9% (51 of 74) for the GA group and MS group, respectively (P = 0.816). The sensitivity was 98.2% in the GA group (confidence interval, 97-100%) and 98.1% in the MS group (confidence interval, 97-100%) (P = 0.979). EBUS was completed in all patients in the GA group, and in 69 patients (93.3%) in the MS group (P = 0.028). There were no major complications or escalation of care in either group. Minor complications were more common in the MS group (29.6 vs. 5.3%) (P < 0.001). Most patients stated they \"definitely would\" undergo this procedure again in both groups (P = 0.355). EBUS-TBNA performed under MS results in comparable diagnostic yield, rate of major complications, and patient tolerance as under GA. Future prospective multicenter studies are required to corroborate our findings. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT 01430962).
Standard endoscopy with random biopsies versus narrow band imaging targeted biopsies in Barrett's oesophagus: a prospective, international, randomised controlled trial
Background White light endoscopy with random biopsies is the standard for detection of intestinal metaplasia (IM) and neoplasia in patients with Barrett's oesophagus (BO). Narrow band imaging (NBI) highlights surface patterns that correlate with IM and neoplasia in BO. Objective To compare high-definition white light (HD-WLE) and NBI for detection of IM and neoplasia in BO. Design International, randomised, crossover trial comparing HD-WLE and NBI. Patients referred for BO screening/surveillance at three tertiary referral centres were prospectively enrolled and randomised to HD-WLE or NBI followed by other procedures in 3–8 weeks. During HD-WLE, four quadrant biopsies every 2 cm, together with targeted biopsies of visible lesions (Seattle protocol), were obtained. During NBI examination, mucosal and vascular patterns were noted and targeted biopsies were obtained. All biopsies were read by a single expert gastrointestinal pathologist in a blinded fashion. Results 123 patients with BO (mean age 61; 93% male; 97% Caucasian) with mean circumferential and maximal extents of 1.8 and 3.6 cm, respectively, were enrolled. Both HD-WLE and NBI detected 104/113 (92%) patients with IM, but NBI required fewer biopsies per patient (3.6 vs 7.6, p<0.0001). NBI detected a higher proportion of areas with dysplasia (30% vs 21%, p=0.01). During examination with NBI, all areas of high-grade dysplasia and cancer had an irregular mucosal or vascular pattern. Conclusions NBI targeted biopsies can have the same IM detection rate as an HD-WLE examination with the Seattle protocol while requiring fewer biopsies. In addition, NBI targeted biopsies can detect more areas with dysplasia. Regular appearing NBI surface patterns did not harbour high-grade dysplasia/cancer, suggesting that biopsies could be avoided in these areas.
Comparison between Ultrasound Guided Transperineal and Transrectal Prostate Biopsy: A Prospective, Randomized and Controlled Trial
This prospective study of comparing transperineal prostate biopsy (TPBx) with transrectal prostate biopsy (TRBx) was aimed to provide evidence for clinicians to select the appropriate biopsy approach under different conditions. TPBx (n = 173) and TRBx (n = 166) were performed randomly for 339 patients who were suspicious of prostate cancer (PCa). The cancer detection rate (CDR), complication rate, visual analogue scale (VAS) score, most painful procedure, number of repeated biopsy and additional anesthesia and operating time (starting from lying down on the operating table to getting up) were recorded. The results showed that TPBx and TRBx were equivalent in CDR (35.3% vs. 31.9%) and minor complication rate (44.9% vs. 41.0%) (both P  > 0.05). The major complication rate was lower in TPBx than in TRBx (0.6% vs. 4.3%, P  < 0.05). T P Bx was more time-consuming (17.51 ± 3.33 min vs. 14.73 ± 3.25 min) and painful (VAS score: 4.0 vs. 2.0); and it had higher rates of repeated biopsy (3.2% vs. 1.1%) and additional anesthesia (15.0% vs. 1.2%) (all P  < 0.05). In summary, both TPBx and TRBx are effective to detect PCa. The major complication rate for TRBx is higher, whereas TPBx procedure is more complex and painful.
Ultrasound-Guided Pleural Needle Biopsy Which Needle for Which Patient: A Prospective Randomized Study
Given the growing incidence of pleural effusions and the limited availability of medical thoracoscopy (MT) in clinical practice, ultrasound (US)-guided pleural needle biopsies using Abrams or cutting needles are increasingly being used for the histopathological diagnosis of pleural diseases. To assessed the diagnostic yield and safety of US-guided Abrams and cutting needles to determine the optimal needle type for specific clinical situations. Prospective randomized study. The study included 174 patients with undiagnosed pleural effusion requiring histopathological evaluation. Patients were randomized into two arms: those who underwent US-guided cutting needle biopsy (US-CNPB) and those who underwent US-guided Abrams needle biopsy (US-ANPB). The US-CNPB group exhibited a false-negative rate of 36.9% and diagnostic accuracy of 63.0%. compared to 21.3% and 78.7% in the US-ANPB group, with significant differences between the groups ( = 0.036 and 0.045, respectively). In patients with pleural thickening < 1 cm or absent on US, US-CNPB exhibited 55.2% diagnostic accuracy and a negative likelihood ratio (-LR) of 0.57. For US-ANPB, the corresponding rates were 77.3% and 0.32. The difference in diagnostic accuracy between the two groups was significant ( = 0.009). In patients with pleural thickening ≥ 1 cm, the diagnostic accuracy of US-CNPB was 93.3% and 88.9% for US-ANPB, with no significant difference between the groups. The corresponding -LR values were 0.08 and 0.17. In patients with pleural thickening < 1 cm, four major bleeding events (6.9%) occurred in the US-CNPB group. No deaths were reported in this study. US-CNPB should be preferred in patients with pleural thickness ≥ 1 cm on US. MT is recommended for patients with pleural thickening < 1 cm or those presenting with pleural effusion without pleural thickening. However, in the absence of MT, US-ANPB is the preferred alternative because of its superior diagnostic accuracy and procedural safety.
Bronchoscopic transparenchymal nodule access (BTPNA): first in human trial of a novel procedure for sampling solitary pulmonary nodules
Introduction The promise of benefits from lung cancer screening is tempered by the false positive rate and the need to perform diagnostic procedures to determine the aetiology of the solitary pulmonary nodules (SPN) identified. We have developed a novel procedure which allows sampling of SPNs via a transparenchymal approach, and report the results from this as a first in human trial. Methods This study was a prospective single-arm interventional study. We recruited patients with a SPN detected on CT imaging, which was suspicious for lung cancer, who were suitable for surgical resection. Using the subject's CT, an optimal airway wall point of entry (POE), and an avascular path through lung tissue from the POE to the SPN was calculated. A tunnel tract was created from the POE to the nodule using a set of catheter-based tools under fused fluoroscopy guidance. The patients proceeded to surgical resection immediately after the biopsy. The participants were followed-up for 6 months after the procedure. The primary endpoint of the study was to evaluate the feasibility to access and biopsy the nodule. Results Twelve patients were recruited, and a tunnel pathway created in 10 patients. There were no adverse events during the procedures. Adequate biopsies were obtained from 10 patients (83%), which correlated with the histological findings from the surgical resection. Inspection of the resected lobes did not raise any safety concerns and indicated appropriately tunnelled pathways to the nodule. Conclusions This first in human study demonstrates that bronchoscopic transparenchymal access of SPNs is feasible. Trial registration number NCT02130115.