Vše

Co hledáte?

Vše
Projekty
Výsledky výzkumu
Subjekty

Rychlé hledání

  • Projekty podpořené TA ČR
  • Významné projekty
  • Projekty s nejvyšší státní podporou
  • Aktuálně běžící projekty

Chytré vyhledávání

  • Takto najdu konkrétní +slovo
  • Takto z výsledků -slovo zcela vynechám
  • “Takto můžu najít celou frázi”

Cancer detection rates and inter-examiner variability of MRI/TRUS fusion targeted biopsy and systematic transrectal biopsy

Identifikátory výsledku

  • Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

    <a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F00216208%3A11110%2F20%3A10414590" target="_blank" >RIV/00216208:11110/20:10414590 - isvavai.cz</a>

  • Nalezeny alternativní kódy

    RIV/00064190:_____/19:N0000130 RIV/00216208:11120/20:43920523 RIV/00216208:11130/20:10414590 RIV/00064203:_____/20:10414590 RIV/00064190:_____/20:N0000044

  • Výsledek na webu

    <a href="https://verso.is.cuni.cz/pub/verso.fpl?fname=obd_publikace_handle&handle=k5.zyP_V95" target="_blank" >https://verso.is.cuni.cz/pub/verso.fpl?fname=obd_publikace_handle&handle=k5.zyP_V95</a>

  • DOI - Digital Object Identifier

    <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.5507/bp.2019.050" target="_blank" >10.5507/bp.2019.050</a>

Alternativní jazyky

  • Jazyk výsledku

    angličtina

  • Název v původním jazyce

    Cancer detection rates and inter-examiner variability of MRI/TRUS fusion targeted biopsy and systematic transrectal biopsy

  • Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

    BACKGROUND: Software-based MRI/TRUS fusion biopsy depends on the coordination of several steps, and inter-examiner differences could influence the results. The aim of this bicentric prospective study was to compare the detection rates of MRI/TRUS fusion targeted biopsy (TG) and systematic biopsy (SB), and the detection rates of examiners with different levels of previous experience in prostate biopsy. METHODS: A total of 419 patients underwent MRI based on a suspicion of prostate cancer with elevated PSA levels. MRI was positive in 395 patients (221 in the first biopsy group [FB] and 174 in the repeated biopsy group [RB]). A subsequent TG, followed by a SB, was performed on these patients by four different examiners. RESULTS: In the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer, a significant difference was found for TG+SB against SB in the RB group (35.1% vs. 25.3%, P=0.047). In the detection of clinically insignificant prostate cancer, the SB had a significantly higher detection rate than TG in both subgroups (FB: 11.9% vs. 4.7%, P=0.008; RB: 13.8% vs. 6.9%, P=0.034). A significant difference was found between the four examiners in the FB for TG (P=0.028), SB (P=0.036), and TG+SB (P=0.017). CONCLUSION: MRI/TRUS TG in combination with SB had significantly higher detection rates than SB in the RB group only. Differences in detection rates between examiners were dependent on the level of previous experience with TRUS guided biopsy.

  • Název v anglickém jazyce

    Cancer detection rates and inter-examiner variability of MRI/TRUS fusion targeted biopsy and systematic transrectal biopsy

  • Popis výsledku anglicky

    BACKGROUND: Software-based MRI/TRUS fusion biopsy depends on the coordination of several steps, and inter-examiner differences could influence the results. The aim of this bicentric prospective study was to compare the detection rates of MRI/TRUS fusion targeted biopsy (TG) and systematic biopsy (SB), and the detection rates of examiners with different levels of previous experience in prostate biopsy. METHODS: A total of 419 patients underwent MRI based on a suspicion of prostate cancer with elevated PSA levels. MRI was positive in 395 patients (221 in the first biopsy group [FB] and 174 in the repeated biopsy group [RB]). A subsequent TG, followed by a SB, was performed on these patients by four different examiners. RESULTS: In the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer, a significant difference was found for TG+SB against SB in the RB group (35.1% vs. 25.3%, P=0.047). In the detection of clinically insignificant prostate cancer, the SB had a significantly higher detection rate than TG in both subgroups (FB: 11.9% vs. 4.7%, P=0.008; RB: 13.8% vs. 6.9%, P=0.034). A significant difference was found between the four examiners in the FB for TG (P=0.028), SB (P=0.036), and TG+SB (P=0.017). CONCLUSION: MRI/TRUS TG in combination with SB had significantly higher detection rates than SB in the RB group only. Differences in detection rates between examiners were dependent on the level of previous experience with TRUS guided biopsy.

Klasifikace

  • Druh

    J<sub>imp</sub> - Článek v periodiku v databázi Web of Science

  • CEP obor

  • OECD FORD obor

    30204 - Oncology

Návaznosti výsledku

  • Projekt

  • Návaznosti

    V - Vyzkumna aktivita podporovana z jinych verejnych zdroju

Ostatní

  • Rok uplatnění

    2020

  • Kód důvěrnosti údajů

    S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Údaje specifické pro druh výsledku

  • Název periodika

    Biomedical Papers

  • ISSN

    1213-8118

  • e-ISSN

  • Svazek periodika

    164

  • Číslo periodika v rámci svazku

    3

  • Stát vydavatele periodika

    CZ - Česká republika

  • Počet stran výsledku

    6

  • Strana od-do

    314-319

  • Kód UT WoS článku

    000595645600014

  • EID výsledku v databázi Scopus

    2-s2.0-85091169022