World journal of urology · 2015
Is there still a role for computed tomography and bone scintigraphy in prostate cancer staging? An analysis from the EUREKA-1 database.
СтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеНаблюдательное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Gabriele D, Collura D, Oderda M, Stura I, Fiorito C, Porpiglia F, Terrone C, Zacchero M, Guiot C, Gabriele P
Аннотация
PURPOSE: According to the current guidelines, computed tomography (CT) and bone scintigraphy (BS) are optional in intermediate-risk and recommended in high-risk prostate cancer (PCa). We wonder whether it is time for these examinations to be dismissed, evaluating their staging accuracy in a large cohort of radical prostatectomy (RP) patients.
METHODS: To evaluate the ability of CT to predict lymph node involvement (LNI), we included 1091 patients treated with RP and pelvic lymph node dissection, previously staged with abdomino-pelvic CT. As for bone metastases, we included 1145 PCa patients deemed fit for surgery, previously staged with Tc-99m methylene diphosphonate planar BS.
RESULTS: CT scan showed a sensitivity and specificity in predicting LNI of 8.8 and 98 %; subgroup analysis disclosed a significant association only for the high-risk subgroup of 334 patients (P 0.009) with a sensitivity of 11.8 % and positive predictive value (PPV) of 44.4 %. However, logistic multivariate regression analysis including preoperative risk factors excluded any additional predictive ability of CT even in the high-risk group (P 0.40). These data are confirmed by ROC curve analysis, showing a low AUC of 54 % for CT, compared with 69 % for Partin tables and 80 % for Briganti nomogram. BS showed some positivity in 74 cases, only four of whom progressed, while 49 patients with negative BS progressed during their follow-up, six of them immediately after surgery.
CONCLUSIONS: According to our opinion, the role of CT and BS should be restricted to selected high-risk patients, while clinical predictive nomograms should be adopted for the surgical planning.
METHODS: To evaluate the ability of CT to predict lymph node involvement (LNI), we included 1091 patients treated with RP and pelvic lymph node dissection, previously staged with abdomino-pelvic CT. As for bone metastases, we included 1145 PCa patients deemed fit for surgery, previously staged with Tc-99m methylene diphosphonate planar BS.
RESULTS: CT scan showed a sensitivity and specificity in predicting LNI of 8.8 and 98 %; subgroup analysis disclosed a significant association only for the high-risk subgroup of 334 patients (P 0.009) with a sensitivity of 11.8 % and positive predictive value (PPV) of 44.4 %. However, logistic multivariate regression analysis including preoperative risk factors excluded any additional predictive ability of CT even in the high-risk group (P 0.40). These data are confirmed by ROC curve analysis, showing a low AUC of 54 % for CT, compared with 69 % for Partin tables and 80 % for Briganti nomogram. BS showed some positivity in 74 cases, only four of whom progressed, while 49 patients with negative BS progressed during their follow-up, six of them immediately after surgery.
CONCLUSIONS: According to our opinion, the role of CT and BS should be restricted to selected high-risk patients, while clinical predictive nomograms should be adopted for the surgical planning.