Comparing Micro-Ultrasound to mpMRI in Detecting Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer
Objectives: To compare the performance of micro-ultrasound (mUS) with multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) in detecting clinically significant prostate cancer. Materials and Methods: Retrospective data from consecutive patients with any indication for prostate biopsy in 2 academic in...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
MDPI AG
2022-02-01
|
| Series: | Société Internationale d’Urologie Journal |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://siuj.org/index.php/siuj/article/view/157/89 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1850045633063288832 |
|---|---|
| author | Christian Pavlovich Laurence Klotz |
| author_facet | Christian Pavlovich Laurence Klotz |
| author_sort | Christian Pavlovich |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Objectives: To compare the performance of micro-ultrasound (mUS) with multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) in detecting clinically significant prostate cancer.
Materials and Methods: Retrospective data from consecutive patients with any indication for prostate biopsy in 2 academic institutions were included. The operator, blinded to mpMRI, would first scan the prostate and annotate any mUS lesions. All mUS lesions were biopsied. Any mpMRI lesions that did not correspond to mUS lesion upon unblinding were additionally biopsied. Grade group (GG) ≥ 2 was considered clinically significant cancer. The Jeffreys interval method was used to compare performance of mUS with mpMRI with the non-inferiority limit set at −5%.
Results: Imaging and biopsy were performed in 82 patients with 153 lesions. mUS had similar sensitivity to mpMRI (per-lesion analysis: 78.4% versus 72.5%), but lower specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and area under the curve. Micro-ultrasound found GG ≥ 2 in 13% of cases missed by mpMRI, while mpMRI found GG ≥ 2 in 11% of cases missed by mUS. The difference 0.020 (95% CI −0.070 to 0.110) was not statistically significant (P = 0.33).
Conclusion: The sensitivity of mUS in detecting GG ≥ 2 disease was similar to that of mpMRI, but the specificity was lower. Further evaluation with a larger sample size and experienced operators is warranted. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-d57e99c2fa994b71b862b05d185f7b3f |
| institution | DOAJ |
| issn | 2563-6499 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2022-02-01 |
| publisher | MDPI AG |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Société Internationale d’Urologie Journal |
| spelling | doaj-art-d57e99c2fa994b71b862b05d185f7b3f2025-08-20T02:54:39ZengMDPI AGSociété Internationale d’Urologie Journal2563-64992022-02-0131813Comparing Micro-Ultrasound to mpMRI in Detecting Clinically Significant Prostate CancerChristian PavlovichLaurence KlotzObjectives: To compare the performance of micro-ultrasound (mUS) with multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) in detecting clinically significant prostate cancer. Materials and Methods: Retrospective data from consecutive patients with any indication for prostate biopsy in 2 academic institutions were included. The operator, blinded to mpMRI, would first scan the prostate and annotate any mUS lesions. All mUS lesions were biopsied. Any mpMRI lesions that did not correspond to mUS lesion upon unblinding were additionally biopsied. Grade group (GG) ≥ 2 was considered clinically significant cancer. The Jeffreys interval method was used to compare performance of mUS with mpMRI with the non-inferiority limit set at −5%. Results: Imaging and biopsy were performed in 82 patients with 153 lesions. mUS had similar sensitivity to mpMRI (per-lesion analysis: 78.4% versus 72.5%), but lower specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and area under the curve. Micro-ultrasound found GG ≥ 2 in 13% of cases missed by mpMRI, while mpMRI found GG ≥ 2 in 11% of cases missed by mUS. The difference 0.020 (95% CI −0.070 to 0.110) was not statistically significant (P = 0.33). Conclusion: The sensitivity of mUS in detecting GG ≥ 2 disease was similar to that of mpMRI, but the specificity was lower. Further evaluation with a larger sample size and experienced operators is warranted.https://siuj.org/index.php/siuj/article/view/157/89prostate cancermulti-parametric mrimicro-ultrasoundpi-radspri-mus |
| spellingShingle | Christian Pavlovich Laurence Klotz Comparing Micro-Ultrasound to mpMRI in Detecting Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer Société Internationale d’Urologie Journal prostate cancer multi-parametric mri micro-ultrasound pi-rads pri-mus |
| title | Comparing Micro-Ultrasound to mpMRI in Detecting Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer |
| title_full | Comparing Micro-Ultrasound to mpMRI in Detecting Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer |
| title_fullStr | Comparing Micro-Ultrasound to mpMRI in Detecting Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer |
| title_full_unstemmed | Comparing Micro-Ultrasound to mpMRI in Detecting Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer |
| title_short | Comparing Micro-Ultrasound to mpMRI in Detecting Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer |
| title_sort | comparing micro ultrasound to mpmri in detecting clinically significant prostate cancer |
| topic | prostate cancer multi-parametric mri micro-ultrasound pi-rads pri-mus |
| url | https://siuj.org/index.php/siuj/article/view/157/89 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT christianpavlovich comparingmicroultrasoundtompmriindetectingclinicallysignificantprostatecancer AT laurenceklotz comparingmicroultrasoundtompmriindetectingclinicallysignificantprostatecancer |