1
|
Souto-Ribeiro I, Woods L, Maund E, Alexander Scott D, Lord J, Picot J, Shepherd J. Transperineal biopsy devices in people with suspected prostate cancer - a systematic review and economic evaluation. Health Technol Assess 2024; 28:1-213. [PMID: 39364806 PMCID: PMC11472213 DOI: 10.3310/zktw8214] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/05/2024] Open
Abstract
Background People with suspected prostate cancer are usually offered either a local anaesthetic transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy or a general anaesthetic transperineal prostate biopsy. Transperineal prostate biopsy is often carried out under general anaesthetic due to pain caused by the procedure. However, recent studies suggest that performing local anaesthetic transperineal prostate biopsy may better identify cancer in particular regions of the prostate and reduce infection rates, while being carried out in an outpatient setting. Devices to assist with freehand methods of local anaesthetic transperineal prostate may also help practitioners performing prostate biopsies. Objectives To evaluate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of local anaesthetic transperineal prostate compared to local anaesthetic transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate and general anaesthetic transperineal prostate biopsy for people with suspected prostate cancer, and local anaesthetic transperineal prostate with specific freehand devices in comparison with local anaesthetic transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate and transperineal prostate biopsy conducted with a grid and stepping device conducted under local or general anaesthetic. Data sources and methods We conducted a systematic review of studies comparing the diagnostic yield and clinical effectiveness of different methods for performing prostate biopsies. We used pairwise and network meta-analyses to pool evidence on cancer detection rates and structured narrative synthesis for other outcomes. For the economic evaluation, we reviewed published and submitted evidence and developed a model to assess the cost-effectiveness of the different biopsy methods. Results We included 19 comparative studies (6 randomised controlled trials and 13 observational comparative studies) and 4 single-arm studies of freehand devices. There were no statistically significant differences in cancer detection rates for local anaesthetic transperineal prostate (any method) compared to local anaesthetic transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate (relative risk 1.00, 95% confidence interval 0.85 to 1.18) (n = 5 randomised controlled trials), as was the case for local anaesthetic transperineal prostate with a freehand device compared to local anaesthetic transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate (relative risk 1.40, 95% confidence interval 0.96 to 2.04) (n = 1 randomised controlled trial). Results of meta-analyses of observational studies were similar. The economic analysis indicated that local anaesthetic transperineal prostate is likely to be cost-effective compared with local anaesthetic transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate (incremental cost below £20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained) and less costly and no less effective than general anaesthetic transperineal prostate. local anaesthetic transperineal prostate with a freehand device is likely to be the most cost-effective strategy: incremental cost versus local anaesthetic transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate of £743 per quality-adjusted life-year for people with magnetic resonance imaging Likert score of 3 or more at first biopsy. Limitations There is limited evidence for efficacy in detecting clinically significant prostate cancer. There is comparative evidence for the PrecisionPoint™ Transperineal Access System (BXTAccelyon Ltd, Burnham, UK) but limited or no evidence for the other freehand devices. Evidence for other outcomes is sparse. The cost-effectiveness results are sensitive to uncertainty over cancer detection rates, complication rates and the numbers of core samples taken with the different biopsy methods and the costs of processing them. Conclusions Transperineal prostate biopsy under local anaesthetic is equally efficient at detecting prostate cancer as transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy under local anaesthetic but it may be better with a freehand device. local anaesthetic transperineal prostate is associated with urinary retention type complications, whereas local anaesthetic transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate has a higher infection rate. local anaesthetic transperineal prostate biopsy with a freehand device appears to meet conventional levels of costeffectiveness compared with local anaesthetic transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate. Study registration This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42021266443. Funding This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Evidence Synthesis programme (NIHR award ref: NIHR134220) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment Vol. 28, No. 60. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.
Collapse
|
2
|
Sonmez G, Golbasi A, Bas U, Akınsal EC, Baydilli N, Tombul ST, Tosun H, Demirtas A, Demirci D. Does the type of the previous biopsy affect the fusion prostate biopsy results? Prostate Int 2024; 12:155-159. [PMID: 39816939 PMCID: PMC11733759 DOI: 10.1016/j.prnil.2024.07.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/28/2024] [Revised: 06/19/2024] [Accepted: 07/01/2024] [Indexed: 01/18/2025] Open
Abstract
Background It has been more than a decade since fusion prostate biopsy (FPB) has been used in the diagnosis of prostate cancer (PCa). Therefore, patients with a previous history of negative FPB and ongoing suspicion of PCa are beginning to emerge. This study investigated whether the first biopsy type (standard or fusion) should be effective in deciding on a second biopsy. Methods Male patients aged 40-75, with a serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) value of less than 10 ng/mL and a negative biopsy history within the last 24 months, who underwent FPB in our clinic due to persistent PSA elevation and/or suspicious multiparametric prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MpMRI) findings were included to the study. Patients were divided into groups according to the type of first biopsy (Group 1; those whose first biopsy was FPB, Group 2; those whose first biopsy was standard prostate biopsy). Some demographic and clinical data of the groups, as well as PCa detection rates, were compared. A p value of less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results A total of 275 patients (Group 1: 84, Group 2: 191) were included in this study. The groups were similar in terms of age, PSA values before the first biopsy, PSA values before the second biopsy, family history of PCa, and prostate volume. PCa was detected at a higher rate in Group 2 than Group 1 (23% vs 15.5%, p = 0.044). Concluison The data obtained from this study indicate that the type of initial biopsy should be taken into account when deciding on FPB in secondary patients with a previous negative biopsy history.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gokhan Sonmez
- Erciyes University, Department of Urology, Devision of UroOncology, Kayseri, Turkey
| | | | - Unsal Bas
- Erciyes University, Department of Urology, Kayseri, Turkey
| | | | - Numan Baydilli
- Erciyes University, Department of Urology, Kayseri, Turkey
| | | | - Halil Tosun
- Erciyes University, Department of Urology, Kayseri, Turkey
| | | | - Deniz Demirci
- Erciyes University, Department of Urology, Devision of UroOncology, Kayseri, Turkey
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Shapiro DD, Ward JF, Lim AH, Nogueras-González GM, Chapin BF, Davis JW, Gregg JR, Chapin BF, Davis JW, Ward JF. Comparing confirmatory biopsy outcomes between MRI-targeted biopsy and standard systematic biopsy among men being enrolled in prostate cancer active surveillance. BJU Int 2021; 127:340-348. [PMID: 32357283 PMCID: PMC9798524 DOI: 10.1111/bju.15100] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 04/27/2020] [Indexed: 12/31/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To evaluate the ability of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-targeted biopsy combined with systematic biopsy (MRI-biopsy) to reduce negative biopsies and detect clinically significant prostate cancer compared to systematic biopsy (SB) alone in the confirmatory biopsy setting using matched cohorts. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients were identified from an active surveillance database who had a previously positive transrectal ultrasonography-guided SB followed by a confirmatory biopsy at a single institution between 2006 and 2019. Patients were divided into two cohorts based on confirmatory biopsy technique: SB alone or MRI-biopsy (which included MRI-targeted and systematic biopsies). Cohorts were then matched on age, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level, number of positive cores on initial biopsy and initial biopsy Gleason grade group (GG). Logistic regression was performed to identify associations with confirmatory biopsy upgrading. RESULTS After matching, 514 patients were identified (257 per cohort). PSA, prostate volume and PSA density prior to initial biopsy, in addition to total number of initial biopsy positive cores and GG, were similar between the matched cohorts. After confirmatory biopsy, 118/257 patients (45.9%) in the MRI-biopsy cohort were upgraded compared to 46/257 patients (17.9%) in the SB cohort (P < 0.001). The rate of negative confirmatory biopsy was 32/257 (12.5%) compared to 97/257 (37.7%) in the MRI-biopsy and SB cohorts, respectively (P < 0.001). Confirmatory MRI-biopsy was associated with greater odds of confirmatory biopsy upgrade from GG 1 to ≥GG 2 compared to SB alone (odds ratio 3.62, 95% confidence interval 1.97-6.63; P < 0.001). CONCLUSION The addition of MRI-targeted biopsies to SB in the confirmatory biopsy setting among men with previously detected prostate cancer resulted in fewer negative confirmatory biopsies and detection of more clinically significant prostate cancer compared to SB alone.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Daniel D. Shapiro
- Department of Urology, The University of Texas, M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - John F. Ward
- Department of Urology, The University of Texas, M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Amy H. Lim
- Department of Urology, The University of Texas, M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | | | - Brian F. Chapin
- Department of Urology, The University of Texas, M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - John W. Davis
- Department of Urology, The University of Texas, M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Justin R. Gregg
- Department of Urology, The University of Texas, M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Brian F Chapin
- Department of Urology, Anderson Cancer Centre, University of Texas, M.D., Houston, TX, USA
| | - John W Davis
- Department of Urology, Anderson Cancer Centre, University of Texas, M.D., Houston, TX, USA
| | - John F Ward
- Department of Urology, Anderson Cancer Centre, University of Texas, M.D., Houston, TX, USA
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Rahman IA, Nusaly IF, Syahrir S, Nusaly H, Kasim F. Optimizing biopsy strategy for prostate cancer: Bayesian framework of network meta-analysis and hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic model for diagnostic accuracy. INDIAN JOURNAL OF UROLOGY : IJU : JOURNAL OF THE UROLOGICAL SOCIETY OF INDIA 2021; 37:20-31. [PMID: 33850352 PMCID: PMC8033239 DOI: 10.4103/iju.iju_187_20] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/17/2020] [Revised: 07/24/2020] [Accepted: 10/12/2020] [Indexed: 12/09/2022]
Abstract
Overdiagnosis and overtreatment are well known problems in prostate cancer (PCa). The transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) Guided biopsy (GB) as a current gold standard investigation has a low positive detection rate resulting in unnecessary biopsies. The choice of optimal biopsy strategy needs to be defined. Therefore, we undertook a Bayesian network meta analysis (NMA) and Bayesian prediction in the hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic (HSROC) model to present a method for optimizing biopsy strategy in PCa. Twenty eight relevant studies were retrieved through online databases of EMBASE, MEDLINE, and CENTRAL up to February 2020. Markov chain Monte Carlo simulation and Surface Under the Cumulative RAnking curve were used to calculate the rank probability using odds ratio with 95% credible interval. HSROC model was used to formulate the predicted true sensitivity and specificity of each biopsy strategy. Six different PCa biopsy strategies including transrectal ultrasound GB (TRUS GB), fusion GB (FUS GB), fusion + transrectal ultrasound GB (FUS + TRUS GB), magnetic resonance imaging GB (MRI GB), transperineal ultrasound GB (TPUS GB), and contrast enhanced ultrasound GB were analyzed in this study with a total of 7584 patients. These strategies were analyzed on five outcomes including detection rate of overall PCa, clinically significant PCa, insignificant PCa, complication rate, and HSROC. The rank probability showed that the overall PCa detection rate was higher in FUS + TRUS GB, MRI GB, and FUS GB. In terms of clinically significant PCa detection, FUS + TRUS GB and FUS GB had a relatively higher clinically significant PCa detection rate, whereas TRUS GB had a relatively lower rate for clinically significant PCa detection rate. MRI GB (91% and 81%) and FUS GB (82% and 83%) had the highest predicted true sensitivity and specificity, respectively, whereas TRUS GB (62% and 83%) had a lower predicted true sensitivity and specificity. MRI GB, FUS GB, and FUS + TRUS GB were associated with lower complication rate, whereas TPUS GB and TRUS GB were more associated with higher complication rate. This NMA and HSROC model highlight the important finding that FUS + TRUS GB, FUS GB, and MRI GB were superior compared with other strategies to avoid the overdiagnosis and overtreatment of PCa. FUS GB, MRI GB, and FUS + TRUS GB had lower complication rates. These results may assist in shared decision making between patients, carers, and their surgeons.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ilham Akbar Rahman
- Department of Urology, Faculty of Medicine, Hasanuddin University, Makassar, Indonesia
| | - Ilham Fauzan Nusaly
- Department of Urology, Faculty of Medicine, Hasanuddin University, Makassar, Indonesia
| | - Syakri Syahrir
- Department of Urology, Faculty of Medicine, Hasanuddin University, Makassar, Indonesia
| | - Harry Nusaly
- Department of Urology, Faculty of Medicine, Hasanuddin University, Makassar, Indonesia
| | - Firdaus Kasim
- Department of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, Hasanuddin University, Makassar, Indonesia
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Hu X, Yang ZQ, Shao YX, Dou WC, Xiong SC, Yang WX, Li X. MRI-targeted biopsy versus standard transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Abdom Radiol (NY) 2020; 45:3283-3292. [PMID: 31897680 DOI: 10.1007/s00261-019-02370-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/05/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE For men with a suspicion of prostate cancer (PCa), the transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy (TRUS-Bx) was recommended. Multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging (mp-MRI) could be more useful to more accurately selected patients who are with a clinical suspicion of PCa and eligible for biopsy, and avoid a biopsy if the result was negative. In the present study, we compared the MRI-targeted biopsy (MRI-TBx) with TRUS-Bx. METHODS We searched the following online database: PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library, and the search was updated to March 2019. RESULTS Finally, a total of 8 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comprising 2593 patients were enrolled in the final analysis. MRI-TBx and TRUS-Bx did not significantly differ in overall PCa (RR = 1.30; 95% CI 0.98-1.72; P = 0.067), clinically significant PCa (RR = 1.35; 95% CI 0.98-1.86; P = 0.065), and clinically insignificant PCa (RR = 0.76; 95% CI 0.40-1.46; P = 0.416). While in patients with initial biopsy, MRI-TBx had a significantly higher detection rate of overall PCa (RR = 1.40; 95% CI 1.01-1.94; P = 0.045). CONCLUSION In the present study, we found that MRI-TBx potentially benefits the detection of overall and clinically significant PCa compared with TRUS-Bx in patients with a suspicion of PCa. Furthermore, in patients with initial biopsy, MRI-TBx had a significantly higher detection rate of overall PCa and a potentially higher detection rate of clinically significant PCa. While for patients with prior negative biopsy, we did not detect significant differences in overall and clinically significant PCa between two groups. More large and multicenter RCTs are further required.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Xu Hu
- West China School of Medicine/West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, 610041, People's Republic of China
| | - Zhi-Qiang Yang
- West China School of Medicine/West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, 610041, People's Republic of China
| | - Yan-Xiang Shao
- West China School of Medicine/West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, 610041, People's Republic of China
| | - Wei-Chao Dou
- West China School of Medicine/West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, 610041, People's Republic of China
| | - San-Chao Xiong
- West China School of Medicine/West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, 610041, People's Republic of China
| | - Wei-Xiao Yang
- West China School of Medicine/West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, 610041, People's Republic of China
| | - Xiang Li
- Department of Urology, West China Medical School, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, 37 Guoxue Street, Chengdu, 610041, People's Republic of China.
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Yamada Y, Ukimura O, Kaneko M, Matsugasumi T, Fujihara A, Vourganti S, Marks L, Sidana A, Klotz L, Salomon G, de la Rosette J. Moving away from systematic biopsies: image-guided prostate biopsy (in-bore biopsy, cognitive fusion biopsy, MRUS fusion biopsy) -literature review. World J Urol 2020; 39:677-686. [PMID: 32728885 DOI: 10.1007/s00345-020-03366-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/29/2020] [Accepted: 07/11/2020] [Indexed: 10/23/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To compare the detection rate of clinically significant cancer (CSCa) by magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy (MRI-TB) with that by standard systematic biopsy (SB) and to evaluate the role of MRI-TB as a replacement from SB in men at clinical risk of prostate cancer. METHODS The non-systematic literature was searched for peer-reviewed English-language articles using PubMed, including the prospective paired studies, where the index test was MRI-TB and the comparator text was SB. Also the randomized clinical trials (RCTs) are included if one arm was MRI-TB and another arm was SB. RESULTS Eighteen prospective studies used both MRI-TB and TRUS-SB, and eight RCT received one of the tests for prostate cancer detection. In most prospective trials to compare MRI-TB vs. SB, there was no significant difference in any cancer detection rate; however, MRI-TB detected more men with CSCa and fewer men with CISCa than SB. CONCLUSION MRI-TB is superior to SB in detection of CSCa. Since some significant cancer was detected by SB only, a combination of SB with the TB technique would avoid the underdiagnosis of CSCa.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yasuhiro Yamada
- Department of Urology, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine, Kawaramachi-Hirokoji, Kyoto, 602-8566, Japan
| | - Osamu Ukimura
- Department of Urology, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine, Kawaramachi-Hirokoji, Kyoto, 602-8566, Japan.
| | - Masatomo Kaneko
- Department of Urology, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine, Kawaramachi-Hirokoji, Kyoto, 602-8566, Japan
| | - Toru Matsugasumi
- Department of Urology, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine, Kawaramachi-Hirokoji, Kyoto, 602-8566, Japan
| | - Atsuko Fujihara
- Department of Urology, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine, Kawaramachi-Hirokoji, Kyoto, 602-8566, Japan
| | | | - Leonard Marks
- Department of Urology, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Abhinav Sidana
- Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Laurence Klotz
- Division of Urology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
| | - Georg Salomon
- Prostate Cancer Centre, Martini Clinic, University Medical Centre Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | | |
Collapse
|
7
|
Harland N, Stenzl A, Todenhöfer T. Role of Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Predicting Pathologic Outcomes in Prostate Cancer. World J Mens Health 2020; 39:38-47. [PMID: 32648376 PMCID: PMC7752518 DOI: 10.5534/wjmh.200030] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/22/2020] [Revised: 04/10/2020] [Accepted: 05/04/2020] [Indexed: 12/21/2022] Open
Abstract
Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) and the introduction of standardized protocols for its interpretation have had a significant impact on the field of prostate cancer (PC). Multiple randomized controlled trials have shown that the sensitivity for detection of clinically significant PC is increased when mpMRI results are the basis for indication of a prostate biopsy. The added value with regards to sensitivity has been strongest for patients with persistent suspicion for PC after a prior negative biopsy. Although enhanced sensitivity of mpMRI is convincing, studies that have compared mpMRI with prostatectomy specimens prepared by whole-mount section analysis have shown a significant number of lesions that were not detected by mpMRI. In this context, the importance of an additional systematic biopsy (SB) is still being debated. While SB in combination with targeted biopsies leads to an increased detection rate, most of the tumors detected by SB only are considered clinically insignificant. Currently, multiple risk calculation tools are being developed that include not only clinical parameters but mpMRI results in addition to clinical parameters in order to improve risk stratification for PC, such as the Partin tables. In summary, mpMRI of the prostate has become a standard procedure recommended by multiple important guidelines for the diagnostic work-up of patients with suspicion of PC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Niklas Harland
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Tübingen, Germany
| | - Arnulf Stenzl
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Tübingen, Germany.,Medical School, Eberhard-Karls-University Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
| | - Tilman Todenhöfer
- Medical School, Eberhard-Karls-University Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.,Clinical Trial Unit, Studienpraxis Urologie, Nürtingen, Germany.
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Kasivisvanathan V, Stabile A, Neves JB, Giganti F, Valerio M, Shanmugabavan Y, Clement KD, Sarkar D, Philippou Y, Thurtle D, Deeks J, Emberton M, Takwoingi Y, Moore CM. Magnetic Resonance Imaging-targeted Biopsy Versus Systematic Biopsy in the Detection of Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Eur Urol 2019; 76:284-303. [PMID: 31130434 DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2019.04.043] [Citation(s) in RCA: 167] [Impact Index Per Article: 27.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/22/2019] [Accepted: 04/29/2019] [Indexed: 01/08/2023]
Abstract
CONTEXT Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-targeted prostate biopsy (MRI-TB) may be an alternative to systematic biopsy for diagnosing prostate cancer. OBJECTIVE 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. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION 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. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS 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). CONCLUSIONS MRI-TB is an attractive alternative diagnostic strategy to systematic biopsy. PATIENT SUMMARY 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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Veeru Kasivisvanathan
- Division of Surgery and Interventional Science, University College, London, UK; British Urology Researchers in Surgical Training (BURST) Research Collaborative, London, UK.
| | - Armando Stabile
- Division of Surgery and Interventional Science, University College, London, UK; British Urology Researchers in Surgical Training (BURST) Research Collaborative, London, UK; Department of Urology and Division of Experimental Oncology, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy
| | - Joana B Neves
- Division of Surgery and Interventional Science, University College, London, UK; British Urology Researchers in Surgical Training (BURST) Research Collaborative, London, UK
| | - Francesco Giganti
- Division of Surgery and Interventional Science, University College, London, UK; Department of Radiology, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Massimo Valerio
- Department of Urology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Vaudois, Lausanne, Switzerland
| | - Yaalini Shanmugabavan
- Division of Surgery and Interventional Science, University College, London, UK; British Urology Researchers in Surgical Training (BURST) Research Collaborative, London, UK
| | - Keiran D Clement
- British Urology Researchers in Surgical Training (BURST) Research Collaborative, London, UK; Queen Elizabeth University Hospital, Glasgow, UK
| | - Debashis Sarkar
- British Urology Researchers in Surgical Training (BURST) Research Collaborative, London, UK; Royal Hampshire County Hospital, Winchester, UK
| | - Yiannis Philippou
- British Urology Researchers in Surgical Training (BURST) Research Collaborative, London, UK; Nuffield Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - David Thurtle
- British Urology Researchers in Surgical Training (BURST) Research Collaborative, London, UK; Academic Urology Group, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Jonathan Deeks
- Institute of Applied Health Research, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK; NIHR Birmingham Biomedical Research Centre (University Hospital Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust and University of Birmingham), Birmingham, UK
| | - Mark Emberton
- Division of Surgery and Interventional Science, University College, London, UK; NIHR UCLH/UCL Comprehensive Biomedical Research Centre, London, UK
| | - Yemisi Takwoingi
- Institute of Applied Health Research, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK; NIHR Birmingham Biomedical Research Centre (University Hospital Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust and University of Birmingham), Birmingham, UK
| | - Caroline M Moore
- Division of Surgery and Interventional Science, University College, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Woo S, Suh CH, Eastham JA, Zelefsky MJ, Morris MJ, Abida W, Scher HI, Sidlow R, Becker AS, Wibmer AG, Hricak H, Vargas HA. Comparison of Magnetic Resonance Imaging-stratified Clinical Pathways and Systematic Transrectal Ultrasound-guided Biopsy Pathway for the Detection of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. Eur Urol Oncol 2019; 2:605-616. [PMID: 31204311 DOI: 10.1016/j.euo.2019.05.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 27] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/18/2019] [Revised: 05/14/2019] [Accepted: 05/23/2019] [Indexed: 02/02/2023]
Abstract
CONTEXT Recent studies suggested that magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) followed by targeted biopsy ("MRI-stratified pathway") detects more clinically significant prostate cancers (csPCa) than the systematic transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy (TRUS-Bx) pathway, but controversy persists. Several randomized clinical trials (RCTs) were recently published, enabling generation of higher-level evidence to evaluate this hypothesis. OBJECTIVE To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs comparing the detection rates of csPCa in the MRI-stratified pathway and the systematic TRUS-Bx pathway in patients with a suspicion of prostate cancer (PCa). EVIDENCE ACQUISITION PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases were searched up to March 18, 2019. RCTs reporting csPCa detection rates of both pathways in patients with a clinical suspicion of prostate cancer were included. Relative csPCa detection rates of the MRI-stratified pathway were pooled using random-effect model. Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomized trials. A comparison of detection rates of clinically insignificant PCa (cisPCa) and any PCa was also performed. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS Nine RCTs (2908 patients) were included. The MRI-stratified pathway detected more csPCa than the TRUS-Bx pathway (relative detection rate 1.45 [95% confidence interval {CI} 1.09-1.92] for all patients, and 1.42 [95% CI 1.02-1.97] and 1.60 [95% CI 1.01-2.54] for biopsy-naïve and prior negative biopsy patients, respectively). Detection rates were not significantly different between pathways for cisPCa (0.89 [95% CI 0.49-1.62]), but higher in the MRI-stratified pathway for the detection of any PCa (1.39 [95% CI 1.05-1.84]). CONCLUSIONS The MRI-stratified pathway detected more csPCa than the systematic TRUS-guided biopsy pathway in men with a clinical suspicion of PCa, for both biopsy-naïve patients and those with prior negative biopsy. The detection rate of any PCa was higher in the MRI-stratified pathway, but not significantly different from that of cisPCa. PATIENT SUMMARY Our meta-analysis of clinical trials shows that the magnetic resonance imaging-stratified pathway detects more clinically significant prostate cancers than the transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy pathway in men with a suspicion of prostate cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sungmin Woo
- Department of Radiology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
| | - Chong Hyun Suh
- Department of Radiology and Research Institute of Radiology, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - James A Eastham
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Michael J Zelefsky
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Michael J Morris
- Genitourinary Oncology Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Wassim Abida
- Genitourinary Oncology Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Howard I Scher
- Genitourinary Oncology Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Robert Sidlow
- Integrative Medicine Service, Division of Survivorship and Supportive Care, Bendheim Center for Integrative Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Anton S Becker
- Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Andreas G Wibmer
- Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Hedvig Hricak
- Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | | |
Collapse
|
10
|
Ploussard G, Borgmann H, Briganti A, de Visschere P, Fütterer JJ, Gandaglia G, Heidegger I, Kretschmer A, Mathieu R, Ost P, Sooriakumaran P, Surcel C, Tilki D, Tsaur I, Valerio M, van den Bergh R. Positive pre-biopsy MRI: are systematic biopsies still useful in addition to targeted biopsies? World J Urol 2018; 37:243-251. [PMID: 29967944 DOI: 10.1007/s00345-018-2399-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 35] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/16/2018] [Accepted: 06/28/2018] [Indexed: 12/17/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE The diagnostic strategy implementing multiparametric magnet resonance tomography (mpMRI) and targeted biopsies (TB) improves the detection and characterization of significant prostate cancer (PCa). We aimed to assess the clinical usefulness of systematic biopsies (SB) in the setting of patients having a pre-biopsy positive MRI. METHODS A review of the literature was performed in March 2018. All studies investigating the performance of SB in addition to TB (all techniques) were assessed, both in the biopsy-naïve and repeat biopsy setting. RESULTS Evidence demonstrates that TB improves the detection of index-significant PCa compared with SB alone, in both initial and repeat biopsy settings. However, the combination of both TB and SB improved the overall (around 30%) and significant (around 10%) PCa detection rates as compared with TB alone. Significant differences between both biopsy approaches exist regarding cancer location favoring SB for the far lateral sampling, and TB for the anterior zone. Main current pitfalls of pure TB strategy are the learning curve and experience required for mpMRI reading and biopsy targeting, as well as the precision assessment in TB techniques. CONCLUSION A pure TB strategy omitting SB leads to the risk of missing up to 15% of significant cancer, due to limitations of mpMRI performance/reading and of precision during lesion targeting. SB remain necessary, in addition to the TB, to obtain the most accurate assessment of the entire prostate gland in this sub-group of patients at risk of significant disease.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Guillaume Ploussard
- Department of Urology, Saint Jean Languedoc/La Croix du Sud Hospital, 20, route de Revel, 31400, Toulouse, France. .,IUCT-O, Avenue Joliot-Curie, 31000, Toulouse, France.
| | - Hendrik Borgmann
- Department of Urology, University Hospital of Mainz, Mainz, Germany
| | - Alberto Briganti
- Department of Urology, Urological Research Institute, Vita-Salute University and San Raffaele Hospital, Milan, Italy
| | | | - Jurgen J Fütterer
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Radboudumc, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Giorgio Gandaglia
- Department of Urology, Urological Research Institute, Vita-Salute University and San Raffaele Hospital, Milan, Italy
| | - Isabel Heidegger
- Department of Urology, University Hospital of Innsbrück, Innsbrück, Austria
| | | | | | - Piet Ost
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Experimental Cancer Research, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium
| | | | - Cristian Surcel
- Department of Urology, Fundeni Clinical Institute, Bucharest, Romania
| | - Derya Tilki
- Department of Urology, Martini Klinik, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Igor Tsaur
- Department of Urology, University Hospital of Mainz, Mainz, Germany
| | - Massimo Valerio
- Department of Urology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Vaudois, Lausanne, Switzerland
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
11
|
Wang Y, Zhu J, Qin Z, Wang Y, Chen C, Wang Y, Zhou X, Zhang Q, Meng X, Song N. Optimal biopsy strategy for prostate cancer detection by performing a Bayesian network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Cancer 2018; 9:2237-2248. [PMID: 30026819 PMCID: PMC6036722 DOI: 10.7150/jca.24690] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/02/2018] [Accepted: 03/16/2018] [Indexed: 12/23/2022] Open
Abstract
Objective: With the increasing recognition of the over-diagnosis and over-treatment of prostate cancer (PCa), the choice of a better prostate biopsy strategy had confused both the patients and clinical surgeons. Hence, this network meta-analysis was conducted to clarify this question. Methods: In the current network meta-analysis, twenty eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with 4,571 participants were comprehensively identified through Pubmed, Embase and Web of Science databases up to July 2017. The pooled odds ratio (OR) with 95% credible interval (CrI) was calculated by Markov chain Monte Carlo methods. A Bayesian network meta-analysis was conducted by using R-3.4.0 software with the help of package "gemtc" version 0.8.2. Results: Six different PCa biopsy strategies and four clinical outcomes were ultimately analyzed in this study. Although, the efficacy of different PCa biopsy strategies by ORs with corresponding 95% CrIs had not yet reached statistical differences, the cumulative rank probability indicated that overall PCa detection rate from best to worst was FUS-GB plus TRUS-GB, FUS-GB, CEUS, MRI-GB, TRUS-GB and TPUS-GB. In terms of clinically significant PCa detection, CEUS, FUS-GB or FUS-GB plus TRUS-GB had a higher, whereas TRUS-GB or TPUS-GB had a relatively lower significant detection rate. Meanwhile, TPUS-GB or TRUS-GB had a higher insignificant PCa detection rate. As for TRUS-guided biopsy, the general trend was that the more biopsy cores, the higher overall PCa detection rate. As for targeted biopsy, it could yield a comparable or even a better effect with fewer cores, compared with traditional random biopsy. Conclusion: Taken together, in a comprehensive consideration of four clinical outcomes, our outcomes shed light on that FUS-GB or FUS-GB plus TRUS-GB showed their superiority, compared with other puncture methods in the detection of PCa. Moreover, TPUS or TRUS-GB was more easily associated with the over-diagnosis and over-treatment of PCa. In addition, targeted biopsy was obviously more effective than traditional random biopsy. The subsequent RCTs with larger sample sizes were required to validate our findings.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yi Wang
- Department of Urology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, 210029, China
| | - Jundong Zhu
- Department of Urology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, 210029, China.,Current affiliation: Department of Urology, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Changzhou, 213000, China
| | - Zhiqiang Qin
- Department of Urology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, 210029, China
| | - Yamin Wang
- Department of Urology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, 210029, China
| | - Chen Chen
- Department of Urology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, 210029, China
| | - Yichun Wang
- Department of Urology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, 210029, China
| | - Xiang Zhou
- Department of Urology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, 210029, China
| | - Qijie Zhang
- Department of Urology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, 210029, China
| | - Xianghu Meng
- Department of Urology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, 210029, China
| | - Ninghong Song
- Department of Urology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, 210029, China
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Lazzeri M, Lopci E, Lughezzani G, Colombo P, Casale P, Hurle R, Saita A, Leonardi L, Lista G, Peschechera R, Pasini L, Rodari M, Zandegiacomo S, Benetti A, Cardone P, Mrakic F, Balzarini L, Chiti A, Guazzoni G, Buffi NM. Targeted 11C-choline PET-CT/TRUS software fusion-guided prostate biopsy in men with persistently elevated PSA and negative mpMRI after previous negative biopsy. Eur J Hybrid Imaging 2017; 1:9. [PMID: 29782590 PMCID: PMC5954704 DOI: 10.1186/s41824-017-0011-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/06/2017] [Accepted: 09/18/2017] [Indexed: 12/22/2022] Open
Abstract
Background We evaluated the feasibility and accuracy of 11C–choline PET-CT/TRUS fusion-guided prostate biopsy in men with persistently elevated PSA and negative mpMRI or contraindication to MRI, after previous negative biopsy. Clinical data were part of a prospective on-going observational clinical study: “Diagnostic accuracy of target mpMRI/US fusion biopsy in patients with suspected prostate cancer after initial negative biopsy”. Patients with a negative biopsy and negative mpMRI (PI-RADS v.2 < 3) or absolute contraindications to MRI and persistently elevated PSA, were included. All patients underwent 11C–choline PET with dedicated acquisition of the pelvis and PET-CT/TRUS-guided prostate biopsy by Bio-Jet™ fusion system (D&K Technologies, Germany). The primary endpoint was to assess the accuracy of 11C–choline PET-CT to determine the presence and the topographical distribution of PCa. Results Overall, 15 patients (median age 71 yrs. ± 8.89; tPSA 13.5 ng/ml ± 4.3) were analysed. Fourteen had a positive PET scan, which revealed 30 lesions. PCa was detected in 7/15 patients (46.7%) and four patients presented a clinically significant PCa: GS > 6. Over 58 cores, 25 (43.1%) were positive. No statistically significant difference in terms of mean and median values for SUVmax and SUVratio between benign and malignant lesions was found. PCa lesions with GS 3 + 3 (n = 3) showed a median SUVmax and SUVratio of 4.01 and 1.46, compared to 5.45 and 1.57, respectively for lesions with GS >6 (n = 4). Conclusion Software PET-CT/TRUS fusion-guided target biopsy could be a diagnostic alternative in patients with a suspected primary PCa and negative mpMRI, but its specificity appeared low.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Massimo Lazzeri
- Department of Urology, Humanitas Clinical and Research Hospital, via Manzoni 56, 20089 Milan, Rozzano Italy
| | - Egesta Lopci
- Department of Nuclear-Medicine, Humanitas Clinical and Research Hospital, Milan, Rozzano Italy
| | - Giovanni Lughezzani
- Department of Urology, Humanitas Clinical and Research Hospital, via Manzoni 56, 20089 Milan, Rozzano Italy
| | - Piergiuseppe Colombo
- Department of Pathology, Humanitas Clinical and Research Hospital, Milan, Rozzano Italy
| | - Paolo Casale
- Department of Urology, Humanitas Clinical and Research Hospital, via Manzoni 56, 20089 Milan, Rozzano Italy
| | - Rodolfo Hurle
- Department of Urology, Humanitas Clinical and Research Hospital, via Manzoni 56, 20089 Milan, Rozzano Italy
| | - Alberto Saita
- Department of Urology, Humanitas Clinical and Research Hospital, via Manzoni 56, 20089 Milan, Rozzano Italy
| | - Lorenzo Leonardi
- Department of Nuclear-Medicine, Humanitas Clinical and Research Hospital, Milan, Rozzano Italy
| | - Giuliana Lista
- Department of Urology, Humanitas Clinical and Research Hospital, via Manzoni 56, 20089 Milan, Rozzano Italy
| | - Roberto Peschechera
- Department of Urology, Humanitas Clinical and Research Hospital, via Manzoni 56, 20089 Milan, Rozzano Italy
| | - Luisa Pasini
- Department of Urology, Humanitas Clinical and Research Hospital, via Manzoni 56, 20089 Milan, Rozzano Italy
| | - Marcello Rodari
- Department of Nuclear-Medicine, Humanitas Clinical and Research Hospital, Milan, Rozzano Italy
| | - Silvia Zandegiacomo
- Department of Urology, Humanitas Clinical and Research Hospital, via Manzoni 56, 20089 Milan, Rozzano Italy
| | - Alessio Benetti
- Department of Urology, Humanitas Clinical and Research Hospital, via Manzoni 56, 20089 Milan, Rozzano Italy
| | - Pasquale Cardone
- Department of Urology, Humanitas Clinical and Research Hospital, via Manzoni 56, 20089 Milan, Rozzano Italy
| | - Federica Mrakic
- Department of Radiology, Humanitas Clinical and Research Hospital, Milan, Rozzano Italy
| | - Luca Balzarini
- Department of Radiology, Humanitas Clinical and Research Hospital, Milan, Rozzano Italy
| | - Arturo Chiti
- Department of Nuclear-Medicine, Humanitas Clinical and Research Hospital, Milan, Rozzano Italy.,Department of Urology, Humanitas Clinical and Research Hospital, via Manzoni 56, 20089 Milan, Rozzano Italy.,Department of Pathology, Humanitas Clinical and Research Hospital, Milan, Rozzano Italy.,Department of Radiology, Humanitas Clinical and Research Hospital, Milan, Rozzano Italy.,5Humanitas University, Milan, Rozzano Italy
| | - Giorgio Guazzoni
- Department of Urology, Humanitas Clinical and Research Hospital, via Manzoni 56, 20089 Milan, Rozzano Italy.,Department of Pathology, Humanitas Clinical and Research Hospital, Milan, Rozzano Italy.,Department of Radiology, Humanitas Clinical and Research Hospital, Milan, Rozzano Italy.,5Humanitas University, Milan, Rozzano Italy
| | - Nicolò Maria Buffi
- Department of Urology, Humanitas Clinical and Research Hospital, via Manzoni 56, 20089 Milan, Rozzano Italy
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Shah TT, To WKL, Ahmed HU. Magnetic resonance imaging in the early detection of prostate cancer and review of the literature on magnetic resonance imaging-stratified clinical pathways. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther 2017; 17:1159-1168. [PMID: 28933973 DOI: 10.1080/14737140.2017.1383899] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/19/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION With level 1 evidence now available on the diagnostic accuracy of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) we must now utilise this data in developing an MRI-stratified diagnostic pathway for the early detection of prostate cancer. Areas covered: A literature review was conducted and identified seven randomised control trials (RCT's) assessing the diagnostic accuracy of such a pathway against the previously accepted systematic/random trans-rectal ultrasound guided (TRUS) biopsy pathway. The studies were heterogeneous in their design. Five studies assessed the addition of MRI-targeted biopsies to a standard care systematic TRUS biopsy pathway. Three of these studies showed either an increase in their diagnostic accuracy or the potential to remove systematic biopsies. Two studies looked specifically at a targeted biopsy only pathway and although the results were again mixed, there was no decrease in the diagnostic rate and overall significantly fewer biopsy cores were taken in the MRI group. Expert commentary: Results from these RCT's together with multiple retrospective and prospective studies point towards either an improved diagnostic rate for clinically significant cancer and/or a reduction in the need for systematic biopsies with a MRI-stratified pathway. The challenge for the urological community will be to implement pre-biopsy MRI into a routine clinical pathway with likely independent monitoring of standards.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Taimur Tariq Shah
- a Division of Surgery, Department of Surgery and Cancer , Imperial College London , London , UK.,b Imperial Urology, Charing Cross Hospital , Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust , London , UK.,c Division of Surgery and Interventional Sciences , University College London , London , UK.,d Department of Urology , Whittington Hospitals NHS Trust , London , UK
| | - Wilson King Lim To
- c Division of Surgery and Interventional Sciences , University College London , London , UK
| | - Hashim Uddin Ahmed
- a Division of Surgery, Department of Surgery and Cancer , Imperial College London , London , UK.,b Imperial Urology, Charing Cross Hospital , Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust , London , UK
| |
Collapse
|