Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Transperineal MRI-US Fusion-Guided Biopsy with Systematic Sampling for Prostate Cancer: Diagnostic Accuracy and Clinical Implications Across PI-RADS
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Transperineal MRI-US Fusion-Guided Biopsy with Systematic Sampling for Prostate Cancer: Diagnostic Accuracy and Clinical Implications Across PI-RADS
Do you wish to request the book?
Transperineal MRI-US Fusion-Guided Biopsy with Systematic Sampling for Prostate Cancer: Diagnostic Accuracy and Clinical Implications Across PI-RADS
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Transperineal MRI-US Fusion-Guided Biopsy with Systematic Sampling for Prostate Cancer: Diagnostic Accuracy and Clinical Implications Across PI-RADS
2025
Overview
Background/Objectives: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and MRI–ultrasound (US) fusion-targeted biopsy have improved prostate cancer diagnosis, particularly for clinically significant disease. However, the added value of combining systematic biopsy with targeted biopsy remains debated. This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of MRI–US fusion-targeted and systematic transperineal biopsies in detecting prostate cancer and explore the correlation between PI-RADS score and histology. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 356 patients with 452 MRI-detected lesions who underwent both MRI–US fusion-targeted and transperineal systematic biopsies between 2020 and 2023. Clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) was defined as International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) grade ≥ 2. Diagnostic performance metrics (sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy) were calculated for each technique using the combined result as a reference. Subgroup analysis was performed for patients under active surveillance. Results: Prostate cancer was diagnosed in 323 of 452 lesions (71%) and csPCa in 223 lesions (49%). Targeted biopsy demonstrated higher sensitivity (93.7%) and accuracy (79.9%) than systematic biopsy (85.7% sensitivity and 77.6% accuracy), although systematic biopsy provided slightly higher specificity. Systematic biopsy alone identified 8.2% of PCa cases missed by targeted biopsy and upgraded 9.9% of lesions to csPCa. csPCa detection increased with PI-RADS score (23% in PI-RADS 3 and 73% in PI-RADS 5). In active surveillance patients, csPCa was found in 65% of lesions. Conclusions: MRI–US fusion-targeted biopsy improves csPCa detection, but systematic biopsy remains valuable, especially for identifying additional or higher-grade disease. The combined approach provides an optimal diagnostic yield, supporting its continued use in both initial and repeat biopsy settings.
Publisher
MDPI AG,Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute (MDPI)
Subject
We currently cannot retrieve any items related to this title. Kindly check back at a later time.