Urologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2025
[Influence of MRI fusion biopsy on treatment recommendations : How reliable are biopsy results?].
Аннотация на английскомСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Schildhauer P, Müller M, Merseburger A S, Weiler S M, Fürschke A, Elser Y, Moderegger A, Fender H E
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The detection of clinically significant prostate cancer remains a diagnostic challenge. The combination of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) fusion biopsy and systematic biopsy is currently considered standard in primary diagnostics.
OBJECTIVES: The study examined differences in guideline-based treatment recommendations derived from the histology of MRI fusion versus systematic biopsy and their concordance with prostatectomy histology.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 476 patients who underwent prostate biopsy between January 2022 and December 2024 were included. Primary endpoints were histological classification by biopsy method and the resulting treatment recommendations. In a subgroup of 57 patients (115 lesions) who underwent radical prostatectomy, concordance between biopsy and surgical histology was analyzed based on Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) scores. Statistical analyses included binomial test, McNemar's test, Cohen's κ, and binary logistic regression (significance level p < 0.05).
RESULTS: The combined approach detected significantly more clinically relevant cancers than systematic biopsy alone (41.7% vs. 27.9%; p < 0.001) and led to more curative treatment recommendations (36.0% vs. 26.2%; p < 0.001). Compared with MRI fusion biopsy alone, it also yielded a higher rate of curative recommendations (36.0% vs. 32.8%; p < 0.001). Concordance of Gleason scores with prostatectomy findings was highest for PI-RADS 5 lesions (κ = 0.294) and significantly higher than for PI-RADS 3 (p = 0.029).
CONCLUSION: The combined biopsy approach increases the rate of guideline-concordant curative treatment recommendations. However, the added diagnostic value of systematic biopsy remains limited. Higher concordance between biopsy and prostatectomy histology was observed only in PI-RADS 5 lesions.
OBJECTIVES: The study examined differences in guideline-based treatment recommendations derived from the histology of MRI fusion versus systematic biopsy and their concordance with prostatectomy histology.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 476 patients who underwent prostate biopsy between January 2022 and December 2024 were included. Primary endpoints were histological classification by biopsy method and the resulting treatment recommendations. In a subgroup of 57 patients (115 lesions) who underwent radical prostatectomy, concordance between biopsy and surgical histology was analyzed based on Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) scores. Statistical analyses included binomial test, McNemar's test, Cohen's κ, and binary logistic regression (significance level p < 0.05).
RESULTS: The combined approach detected significantly more clinically relevant cancers than systematic biopsy alone (41.7% vs. 27.9%; p < 0.001) and led to more curative treatment recommendations (36.0% vs. 26.2%; p < 0.001). Compared with MRI fusion biopsy alone, it also yielded a higher rate of curative recommendations (36.0% vs. 32.8%; p < 0.001). Concordance of Gleason scores with prostatectomy findings was highest for PI-RADS 5 lesions (κ = 0.294) and significantly higher than for PI-RADS 3 (p = 0.029).
CONCLUSION: The combined biopsy approach increases the rate of guideline-concordant curative treatment recommendations. However, the added diagnostic value of systematic biopsy remains limited. Higher concordance between biopsy and prostatectomy histology was observed only in PI-RADS 5 lesions.