Objective: We aimed to evaluate magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound guided fusion pros-tate biopsy (MRI- US FPBx) results from a single center and to compare with current literature.
Material and Methods: Between January 2016 and July 2019, MRI-US FPBx pathological and imaging results of 358 men were retrospective-ly analyzed. PI-RADS scores were determined as 3, 4 and 5 in 222 (62%), 107 (29.8%) and 29 (8.1%) patients, respectively. Totally 454 lesions were un-derwent MRI-US FPBx. 303 (66.7%) lesions were scored as PI-RADS 3, 120 (26.4%) lesions were scored as PI-RADS 4 and 31 (6.8%) lesions were scored as PI-RADS 5. 315 (69.3%) of lesions were in peripheral zone, 26 (5.7%) were in central zone, 111 (24.4%) were in transitional zone and 2 of them were in anterior fibromuscular stroma.
Results: Overall prostate cancer detection rate was 36.3%. Concerning detection rates, MRI-US FPBx alone and transrectal ultrasonography guid-ed prostate biopsy (TRUS-Bx) alone were 27.6% and 26.5%, respectively. Cancer detection rate only through MRI-US FPBx PIRADS-3 and PI-RADS 4&5 were 6.9% and 20.6%, respectively. Clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) rates were evalu-ated and csPCa to overall prostate cancer (PCa) rates for TRUS-Bx, MRI-US FPBx and combined tech-niques were 16.8%, 35.4% and 39.2%, respectively. Results of 11 patients were evaluated as benign. Conclusion: MRI-US FPBx significantly increases success rate of prostate biopsy procedure.
Regarding current MRI technology, it is not appropriate to consider MRI-US FPBx as a stand-alone biopsy option without concomitant with TRUS-Bx.
Keywords: prostate cancer; biopsy; MRI; fusion
ABSTRACT
Objective: We aimed to evaluate magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound guided fusion pros-tate biopsy (MRI- US FPBx) results from a single center and to compare with current literature.
Material and Methods: Between January 2016 and July 2019, MRI-US FPBx pathological and imaging results of 358 men were retrospective-ly analyzed. PI-RADS scores were determined as 3, 4 and 5 in 222 (62%), 107 (29.8%) and 29 (8.1%) patients, respectively. Totally 454 lesions were un-derwent MRI-US FPBx. 303 (66.7%) lesions were scored as PI-RADS 3, 120 (26.4%) lesions were scored as PI-RADS 4 and 31 (6.8%) lesions were scored as PI-RADS 5. 315 (69.3%) of lesions were in peripheral zone, 26 (5.7%) were in central zone, 111 (24.4%) were in transitional zone and 2 of them were in anterior fibromuscular stroma.
Results: Overall prostate cancer detection rate was 36.3%. Concerning detection rates, MRI-US FPBx alone and transrectal ultrasonography guid-ed prostate biopsy (TRUS-Bx) alone were 27.6% and 26.5%, respectively. Cancer detection rate only through MRI-US FPBx PIRADS-3 and PI-RADS 4&5 were 6.9% and 20.6%, respectively. Clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) rates were evalu-ated and csPCa to overall prostate cancer (PCa) rates for TRUS-Bx, MRI-US FPBx and combined tech-niques were 16.8%, 35.4% and 39.2%, respectively. Results of 11 patients were evaluated as benign. Conclusion: MRI-US FPBx significantly increases success rate of prostate biopsy procedure.
Regarding current MRI technology, it is not appropriate to consider MRI-US FPBx as a stand-alone biopsy option without concomitant with TRUS-Bx.
Keywords: prostate cancer; biopsy; MRI; fusion