MP81-04 SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS COMPARING COGNITIVE VS IMAGE-GUIDED FUSION PROSTATE BIOPSY FOR THE DETECTION OF PROSTATE CANCER

Abstract

You have accessJournal of UrologyProstate Cancer: Detection & Screening VIII (MP81)1 Apr 2020MP81-04 SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS COMPARING COGNITIVE VS IMAGE-GUIDED FUSION PROSTATE BIOPSY FOR THE DETECTION OF PROSTATE CANCER Laena Frechette*, Ben Muller, Dan Ilinksy, Alex Sankin, Evan Kovac, Ahmed Aboumohamed, and Kara Watts Laena Frechette*Laena Frechette* More articles by this author , Ben MullerBen Muller More articles by this author , Dan IlinksyDan Ilinksy More articles by this author , Alex SankinAlex Sankin More articles by this author , Evan KovacEvan Kovac More articles by this author , Ahmed AboumohamedAhmed Aboumohamed More articles by this author , and Kara WattsKara Watts More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000000973.04AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: Data comparing MRI-ultrasound image guided fusion prostate biopsy (FB) and cognitive biopsy (CB) are lacking. We sought to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing rates of overall and clinically-significant prostate cancer (PCa) detection between FB and CB. METHODS: A systematic review of Pubmed, EMBASE, MEDLINE, and Cochrane library databases was performed. Identified studies were assessed for clinical relevance and excluded based on a set of predefined criteria. Final articles included in the analysis comprised only prospective trials that directly compared CB versus FB in men with MRI-identifiable lesions (PIRADS score 2+). Articles were reviewed for patient demographics, prostate specific antigen (PSA), MRI protocol, and rates of overall and clinically significant prostate cancer detection by both modalities. RESULTS: Nine studies were analyzed. A composite 1714 men with mean age 64.6 years and mean PSA 8.2 ng/dL were reviewed. When comparing FB to CB, the odds ratio for overall and for clinically significant PCa detection was 1.11 (95% CI 0.91-1.36, p=0.30) and 1.13 (95% CI 0.89-1.44, p=0.32), respectively. Heterogeneity among the studies was moderate but not significant for either overall (X2 =14.67; I2 =45%; p = 0.07) or for clinically significant PCa detection (X2 =11.81; I2 =49%; p = 0.07). Operator experience with CB was not reported. CONCLUSIONS: MRI-US fusion biopsy demonstrates a trend toward improved rates of PCa detection compared to CB, although this did not reach statistical significance. Operator experience with CB is an important consideration for CB accuracy, and these data are not frequently reported. Further comparative studies may help to further elucidate whether one of these modalities is superior over the other. Source of Funding: None © 2020 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 203Issue Supplement 4April 2020Page: e1236-e1237 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2020 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Laena Frechette* More articles by this author Ben Muller More articles by this author Dan Ilinksy More articles by this author Alex Sankin More articles by this author Evan Kovac More articles by this author Ahmed Aboumohamed More articles by this author Kara Watts More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...