metricas
Actas Urológicas Españolas (English Edition) Cognitive and fusion MRI-Targeted prostate biopsies: A multicenter comparative a...
Journal Information
Vol. 50. Issue 6.
(July - August 2026)
Cite
Cite
Share
Download PDF
More article options
Visits
623
Vol. 50. Issue 6.
(July - August 2026)
Original article

Cognitive and fusion MRI-Targeted prostate biopsies: A multicenter comparative analysis in 485 patients

Biopsias prostáticas dirigidas por RM cognitiva y por fusión: Un análisis comparativo multicéntrico en 485 pacientes
Visits
623
Emre Hepşena,
Corresponding author
dremrehepsen@gmail.com

Corresponding author.
, Furkan Çapara, İsmail Emre Ergina, Ahmet Emin Doğana, Ahmet Nihat Karakoyunlua, Uğur Kesimalb
a Clinic of Urology, Ankara Etlik City Hospital, Türkiye
b Clinic of Interventional Radiology, Ankara Training and Research Hospital, Türkiye
This item has received
Article information
Abstract
Full Text
Bibliography
Download PDF
Statistics
Abstract
Objectives

This multicenter study aimed to compare the diagnostic performance of cognitive registration targeted biopsy (Cog-Tb) and MRI–transrectal ultrasound fusion targeted biopsy (Fus-Tb) in men with Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) ≥3 lesions.

Materials and methods

Men with PSA ≥ 3 ng/mL and/or abnormal digital rectal examination findings who had mpMRI lesions scored as PI-RADS ≥3 were included. This was a retrospective multicenter study, and the Cog-Tb and Fus-Tb groups were obtained from non-contemporary time periods and from different operators (Cog-Tb performed by urologists, Fus-Tb by a dedicated interventional radiologist). Atotal of 267 patients who underwent Cog-Tb and 218 who underwent Fus-Tb were retrospectively analyzed. At least two targeted cores were obtained from each mpMRI-defined lesion, in addition to 10–12 systematic cores. csPCa was defined as International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Grade Group ≥2. Patients were stratified using a PSAd cutoff value of 0.15. In addition, a predefined stratified analysis by PI-RADS category (3 vs. 4–5) was performed, and odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals were calculated to assess independent predictors of csPCa.

Results

There was no significant difference between Cog-Tb and Fus-Tb in the detection of ISUP ≥ 2 prostate cancer (p = 0.91). In the PI-RADS 3 subgroup, PSAd values were significantly higher in patients with ISUP ≥ 2 compared with those with benign or ISUP 1 pathology for both Cog-Tb (p = 0.02) and Fus-Tb (p = 0.04). Similarly, in the PI-RADS 4–5 subgroup, PSAd levels were significantly higher in patients with ISUP ≥ 2 disease for both biopsy techniques (p = 0.01). Multivariate logistic regression showed that biopsy modality was not an independent predictor of csPCa (OR 1.4, 95% CI 0.8–2.5). In contrast, both PSAd (OR 5.9, 95% CI 2.6–13.1) and PI-RADS category (OR 6.8, 95% CI 3.4–13.4) were strong independent predictors of csPCa.

Conclusion

Cog-Tb and Fus-Tb demonstrated comparable effectiveness in detecting csPCa in patients with PI-RADS ≥3 lesions, particularly when PSAd ≥0.15. In settings lacking fusion technology, Cog-Tb performed by experienced clinicians remains a reliable and cost-effective alternative.

Keywords:
Prostate cancer
Prostate biopsy
Prostate specific antigen
Cognitive fusion biopsy
Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging
Resumen
Objetivos

Este estudio multicéntrico tuvo como objetivo comparar el rendimiento diagnóstico de la biopsia dirigida mediante registro cognitivo (Cog-Tb) y la biopsia dirigida mediante fusión de resonancia magnética y ecografía transrectal (Fus-Tb) en hombres con lesiones clasificadas como Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) ≥3.

Materiales y métodos

Se incluyeron hombres con PSA ≥ 3 ng/mL y/o hallazgos anormales en el tacto rectal digital que presentaban lesiones en mpMRI clasificadas como PI-RADS ≥3. Se trató de un estudio retrospectivo multicéntrico, en el que los grupos Cog-Tb y Fus-Tb procedían de periodos temporales no contemporáneos y fueron realizados por distintos operadores (Cog-Tb por urólogos y Fus-Tb por un radiólogo intervencionista dedicado). Un total de 267 pacientes sometidos a Cog-Tb y 218 sometidos a Fus-Tb fueron analizados retrospectivamente. Se obtuvieron al menos dos cilindros dirigidos de cada lesión definida por mpMRI, además de 10–12 cilindros sistemáticos. El cáncer de próstata clínicamente significativo (csPCa) se definió como International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Grade Group ≥2. Los pacientes se estratificaron utilizando un punto de corte de PSAd de 0.15. Además, se realizó un análisis estratificado predefinido según la categoría PI-RADS (3 frente a 4–5), y se calcularon odds ratios con intervalos de confianza del 95% para evaluar predictores independientes de csPCa.

Resultados

No se observaron diferencias significativas entre Cog-Tb y Fus-Tb en la detección de cáncer de próstata ISUP ≥ 2 (p = 0.91). En el subgrupo PI-RADS 3, los valores de PSAd fueron significativamente mayores en pacientes con ISUP ≥ 2 en comparación con aquellos con patología benigna o ISUP 1, tanto en el grupo Cog-Tb (p = 0.02) como en el grupo Fus-Tb (p = 0.04). De manera similar, en el subgrupo PI-RADS 4–5, los niveles de PSAd fueron significativamente más altos en pacientes con enfermedad ISUP ≥ 2 para ambas técnicas de biopsia (p = 0.01). El análisis de regresión logística multivariante mostró que la modalidad de biopsia no fue un predictor independiente de csPCa (OR 1.4, IC del 95% 0.8–2.5). En cambio, tanto la PSAd (OR 5.9, IC del 95% 2.6–13.1) como la categoría PI-RADS (OR 6.8, IC del 95% 3.4–13.4) fueron predictores independientes sólidos de csPCa.

Conclusión

Cog-Tb y Fus-Tb demostraron una eficacia comparable en la detección de csPCa en pacientes con lesiones PI-RADS ≥3, especialmente cuando PSAd ≥0.15. En entornos donde no se dispone de tecnología de fusión, la Cog-Tb realizada por clínicos experimentados sigue siendo una alternativa fiable y rentable.

Palabras clave:
Cáncer de próstata
Biopsia de próstata
Antígeno prostático específico
Biopsia por fusión cognitiva
Resonancia magnética multiparamétrica

Article

These are the options to access the full texts of the publication Actas Urológicas Españolas (English Edition)
Subscriber
Subscriber

If you already have your login data, please click here .

If you have forgotten your password you can you can recover it by clicking here and selecting the option “I have forgotten my password”
Purchase
Purchase article

Purchasing article the PDF version will be downloaded

Purchase now
Contact
Phone for subscriptions and reporting of errors
From Monday to Friday from 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. (GMT + 1) except for the months of July and August which will be from 9 a.m. to 3 p.m.
Calls from Spain
932 415 960
Calls from outside Spain
+34 932 415 960
E-mail
asdasdasd
Article options
Tools