Magnetic Resonance Imaging-targeted Biopsy Versus Systematic Biopsy in the Detection of Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Détails

ID Serval
serval:BIB_8182888D4478
Type
Article: article d'un périodique ou d'un magazine.
Sous-type
Synthèse (review): revue aussi complète que possible des connaissances sur un sujet, rédigée à partir de l'analyse exhaustive des travaux publiés.
Collection
Publications
Titre
Magnetic Resonance Imaging-targeted Biopsy Versus Systematic Biopsy in the Detection of Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
Périodique
European urology
Auteur(s)
Kasivisvanathan V., Stabile A., Neves J.B., Giganti F., Valerio M., Shanmugabavan Y., Clement K.D., Sarkar D., Philippou Y., Thurtle D., Deeks J., Emberton M., Takwoingi Y., Moore C.M.
ISSN
1873-7560 (Electronic)
ISSN-L
0302-2838
Statut éditorial
Publié
Date de publication
09/2019
Peer-reviewed
Oui
Volume
76
Numéro
3
Pages
284-303
Langue
anglais
Notes
Publication types: Journal Article ; Review
Publication Status: ppublish
Résumé
Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-targeted prostate biopsy (MRI-TB) may be an alternative to systematic biopsy for diagnosing prostate cancer.
The primary aims of this systematic review and meta-analysis were to compare the detection rates of clinically significant and clinically insignificant cancer by MRI-TB with those by systematic biopsy in men undergoing prostate biopsy to identify prostate cancer.
A literature search was conducted using the PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane library, and Clinicaltrials.gov databases. We included prospective and retrospective paired studies where the index test was MRI-TB and the comparator test was systematic biopsy. We also included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) if one arm included MRI-TB and another arm included systematic biopsy. The risk of bias was assessed using a modified Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 checklist. In addition, the Cochrane risk of bias 2.0 tool was used for RCTs.
We included 68 studies with a paired design and eight RCTs, comprising a total of 14709 men who either received both MRI-TB and systematic biopsy, or were randomised to receive one of the tests. MRI-TB detected more men with clinically significant cancer than systematic biopsy (detection ratio [DR] 1.16 [95% confidence interval {CI} 1.09-1.24], p<0.0001) and fewer men with clinically insignificant cancer than systematic biopsy (DR 0.66 [95% CI 0.57-0.76], p<0.0001). The proportion of cores positive for cancer was greater for MRI-TB than for systematic biopsy (relative risk 3.17 [95% CI 2.82-3.56], p<0.0001).
MRI-TB is an attractive alternative diagnostic strategy to systematic biopsy.
We evaluated the published literature, comparing two methods of diagnosing prostate cancer. We found that biopsies targeted to suspicious areas on magnetic resonance imaging were better at detecting prostate cancer that needs to be treated and avoiding the diagnosis of disease that does not need treatment than the traditional systematic biopsy.
Mots-clé
Clinically insignificant, Clinically significant, Diagnosis, Magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy, Meta-analysis, Prostate cancer, Systematic biopsy, Systematic review
Pubmed
Web of science
Création de la notice
14/06/2019 16:26
Dernière modification de la notice
23/09/2019 5:09
Données d'usage