title: Impact of Real-Time Elastography versus Systematic Prostate Biopsy Method on Cancer Detection Rate in Men with a Serum Prostate-Specific Antigen between 2.5 and 10 ng/mL.
abstract: The actual gold standard for the diagnosis of prostate cancer includes the serum prostate-specific antigen, the digital rectal examination, and the ultrasound-guided systematic prostate biopsy sampling. In the last years, the real-time elastography has been introduced as an imaging technique to increase the detection rate of prostate cancer and simultaneously reduce the number of biopsies sampled for a single patient. Here, we evaluated a consecutive series of 102 patients with negative digital-rectal examination and transrectal ultrasound, and prostate-specific antigen value ranging between 2.5 ng/mL and 10 ng/mL, in order to assess the impact of real-time elastography versus the systematic biopsy on the detection of prostate cancer. We found that only 1 out of 102 patients resulted true positive for prostate cancer when analysed with real-time elastography. In the other 6 cases, real-time elastography evidenced areas positive for prostate cancer, although additional neoplastic foci were found using systematic biopsy sampling in areas evidenced by real-time elastography as negative. Although additional studies are necessary for evaluating the effectiveness of this imaging technique, the present study indicates that the limited accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity do not justify the routine application of real-time elastography in prostate cancer detection.
authors: Department of Urology, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center, Via Manzoni 56, Rozzano, 20089 Milan, Italy.
authors: Gianluigi
authors: G
authors: Taverna
authors: Paola
authors: P
authors: Magnoni
authors: Guido
authors: G
authors: Giusti
authors: Mauro
authors: M
authors: Seveso
authors: Alessio
authors: A
authors: Benetti
authors: Rodolfo
authors: R
authors: Hurle
authors: Piergiuseppe
authors: P
authors: Colombo
authors: Francesco
authors: F
authors: Minuti
authors: Fabio
authors: F
authors: Grizzi
authors: Pierpaolo
authors: P
authors: Graziotti
references: J Urol. 2012 Jun;187(6):2039-43
references: 22498211
references: Urologe A. 2008 Sep;47(9):1212-7
references: 18704361
references: Radiographics. 2009 Nov;29(7):2007-16
references: 19926759
references: Eur Urol. 2005 Oct;48(4):546-51
references: 16046052
references: J Med Eng Technol. 2009;33(8):585-603
references: 19848851
references: Eur Urol. 2008 Mar;53(3):468-77
references: 17997011
references: Urology. 2007 Dec;70(6):1136-40
references: 18158034
references: Ultrason Imaging. 1998 Oct;20(4):260-74
references: 10197347
references: Int J Clin Oncol. 2007 Aug;12(4):250-5
references: 17701002
references: J Oncol. 2012;2012:645146
references: 22848218
references: Hum Pathol. 1992 Mar;23(3):211-22
references: 1372877
references: Int J Urol. 2010 May;17(5):432-47
references: 20415706
references: World J Urol. 2011 Oct;29(5):607-14
references: 21744224
references: Prog Urol. 2011 Dec;21(13):925-31
references: 22118357
references: Eur Urol. 2008 Dec;54(6):1354-62
references: 18374470
references: CA Cancer J Clin. 2009 Jul-Aug;59(4):225-49
references: 19474385
references: Ultrasound Med Biol. 2011 Sep;37(9):1374-81
references: 21816287
references: BJU Int. 2011 Oct;108(8 Pt 2):E217-22
references: 21819532
references: Panminerva Med. 2010 Sep;52(3):189-94
references: 21045775
references: BJU Int. 2011 Dec;108(11):1723-7
references: 21756276
references: Abdom Imaging. 2008 Nov-Dec;33(6):729-35
references: 18196315
references: Biometrics. 1982 Mar;38(1):143-51
references: 7082756
references: Ultrasound Q. 2011 Sep;27(3):177-86
references: 21873855
references: AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2010 Jun;194(6):W471-6
references: 20489064
references: Eur J Radiol. 2012 May;81(5):857-62
references: 21392908
references: J Urol. 2005 Jul;174(1):115-7
references: 15947593
references: J Urol. 2010 Sep;184(3):913-7
references: 20643432