3D versus 2D Systematic Transrectal Ultrasound-Guided Prostate Biopsy: Higher Cancer Detection Rate in Clinical Practice
Author(s) -
Alexandre Peltier,
Fouad Aoun,
Fouad El-Khoury,
Eric Hawaux,
Ksenija Limani,
Krishrahari,
Nicolas Sirtaine,
Roland van Velthoven
Publication year - 2013
Publication title -
prostate cancer
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.377
H-Index - 11
eISSN - 2090-3111
pISSN - 2090-312X
DOI - 10.1155/2013/783243
Subject(s) - medicine , prostate cancer , prostate , biopsy , prostate biopsy , urology , cancer , clinical practice , ultrasound , gynecology , algorithm , radiology , mathematics , family medicine
Objectives . To compare prostate cancer detection rates of extended 2D versus 3D biopsies and to further assess the clinical impact of this method in day-to-day practice. Methods . We analyzed the data of a cohort of 220 consecutive patients with no prior history of prostate cancer who underwent an initial prostate biopsy in daily practice due to an abnormal PSA and/or DRE using, respectively, the classical 2D and the new 3D systems. All the biopsies were done by a single experienced operator using the same standardized protocol. Results . There was no significant difference in terms of age, total PSA, or prostate volume between the two groups. However, cancer detection rate was significantly higher using the 3D versus the 2D system, 50% versus 34% ( P < 0.05). There was no statistically significant difference while comparing the 2 groups in term of nonsignificant cancer detection. Conclusion . There is reasonable evidence demonstrating the superiority of the 3D-guided biopsies in detecting prostate cancers that would have been missed using the 2D extended protocol.
Accelerating Research
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom
Address
John Eccles HouseRobert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom