INTRODUCTION
There are reports that the 12-core template systematic biopsies (SBx) obtained using software registration machines (e.g. Artemis) have higher cancer detection rates (CDRs) of prostate cancer (PCa) than the standard, freehand 12-core transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) guided biopsies. The goal of our study is to compare the clinically significant (CS) CDRs of SBx in two independent cohorts who underwent freehand TRUS-SBx alone (Cohort A) or machine-guided SBx as part of a combined MRI-US fusion biopsy (FBx) (Cohort B).
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A retrospective review of all patients undergoing prostate biopsies over a 4-year period at the University of Cincinnati Medical Center was performed. CS cancer was defined as having a Gleason score ≥ 7. MRI-US FBx were obtained using an Artemis software registration device (ARTEMIS™, Eigen Inc., Grass Valley, CA). Statistical significance was considered at p < 0.05.
RESULTS
Nine hundred and thirty men underwent SBx (Cohort A: 474, Cohort B: 456). There were no statistical differences between cohort A and B in CS CDRs in the overall population (39.3% vs 33.8%; p=0.093), biopsy naïve patients (40.4% vs 39.8%; p=0.951) or patients with a prior negative biopsy (22.7% vs 25.0%; p=0.910). Multivariate logistic regression controlling for age, race, prostate-specific antigen level, prostate volume, abnormal digital rectal exam, and family history of PCa demonstrated comparable CS CDRs, which was maintained when further stratified by prior biopsy history (all patients: OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.71-1.38, p=0.958; biopsy naïve: OR 0.79, 95% CI 0.51-1.22, p=0.291; prior negative biopsy: OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.21-1.75, p=0.403).
CONCLUSIONS
Our study did not find a significant difference in the CS CDRs of machine-guided SBx compared to the freehand TRUS-SBx. Unless the SBx is done at the time of FBx, use of these machines for obtaining SBx only is unlikely to result in any increase of CS CDRs.
[1]
A. Sidana,et al.
Racial disparity in the utilization of multiparametric MRI–ultrasound fusion biopsy for the detection of prostate cancer
,
2020,
Prostate Cancer and Prostatic Diseases.
[2]
P. Whiting,et al.
Comparison of Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Targeted Biopsy With Systematic Biopsy Alone for the Diagnosis of Prostate Cancer
,
2019,
JAMA network open.
[3]
F. Giganti,et al.
A critical comparison of techniques for MRI-targeted biopsy of the prostate
,
2017,
Translational andrology and urology.
[4]
P. Pinto,et al.
Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Ultrasound Fusion-Guided Prostate Biopsy: Review of Technology, Techniques, and Outcomes
,
2016,
Current Urology Reports.
[5]
Shyam Natarajan,et al.
Value of targeted prostate biopsy using magnetic resonance-ultrasound fusion in men with prior negative biopsy and elevated prostate-specific antigen.
,
2014,
European urology.
[6]
F. Montorsi,et al.
Initial extended transrectal prostate biopsy--are more prostate cancers detected with 18 cores than with 12 cores?
,
2008,
The Journal of urology.
[7]
C. Catalano,et al.
Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging vs. standard care in men being evaluated for prostate cancer: a randomized study.
,
2015,
Urologic oncology.
[8]
L. Salomon,et al.
Prospective evaluation of an extended 21-core biopsy scheme as initial prostate cancer diagnostic strategy.
,
2014,
European urology.