The accuracy of Multi-detector row CT for the assessment of tumor invasion of the mesorectal fascia in primary rectal cancer

PURPOSE: To evaluate the accuracy of Multi-detector row CT (MDCT) for the prediction of tumor invasion of the mesorectal fascia (MRF). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 35 patients with primary rectal cancer underwent preoperative staging magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and MDCT. The tumor relationship to the MRF, expressed in 3 categories (1--tumor free MRF = tumor distance > or = 1 mm; 2--threatened = distance < 1 mm; 3--invasion = distance 0 mm) was determined on CT by two observers at patient level and at different anatomical locations. A third expert reader evaluated the MRF tumor relationship on MRI, which served as reference standard. Receiver operating characteristic curves (ROC-curves) and areas under these curves (AUC) were calculated. The inter-observer agreement of CT was determined by using linear weighted kappa statistics. RESULTS: The AUC of CT for MRF invasion was 0.71 for observer 1 and 0.62 for observer 2. The inter-observer agreement was kappa = 0.34. The performance of CT at mid-high rectal levels was statistically significant better compared to low anterior (obs.1: AUC = 0.88 vs. 0.50; obs 2: AUC = 0.84 vs. 0.31; P < or = 0.040). CONCLUSION: Multi-detector row CT has a poor accuracy for predicting MRF invasion in low-anterior located tumors.The accuracy of CT significantly improves for tumors in the mid-high rectum. There is a high inconsistency among readers

A gastric ulcer: double trouble

"

Accuracy of MRI-ultrasound fusion-guided and systematic biopsy of the prostate

Abstract: Objectives Prostate multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) with subsequent targeted biopsy of suspicious lesions has a critical role in the diagnostic workup of prostate cancer. The objective was to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of systematic biopsies, targeted biopsies, and the combination of both in prostate cancer detection. Methods From January 1, 2013 to June 1, 2022, biopsy-na & iuml;ve and prior biopsy-negative patients who underwent both systematic and targeted biopsies were included. MRIs were evaluated according to PI-RADS with biopsy threshold set at PI-RADS >= 3. Systematic biopsies consisted of 8-12 cores, based on prostate volume. Overall prostate cancer and clinically significant cancer (Gleason Score >= 3 + 4) detection rates were stratified based on PI-RADS and location within the prostate, and compared between biopsy types using McNemar test. Results Among 867 patients, 615 had prostate cancer, with 434 clinically significant cases. Overall detection rates were: PI-RADS 3 48%, PI-RADS 4 72%, and PI-RADS 5 90%. Detection rates for clinically significant cancer were 21%, 53%, and 72%, respectively. The combination of biopsy methods was most accurate in detecting clinically significant prostate cancer (P < .001). Targeted biopsies alone detected more clinically significant prostate cancer than systematic biopsies alone (43.1% vs 40.3%, P = .046). For posterior PI-RADS 5 lesions, no statistically significant difference was found between all biopsy methods. Conclusions In the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer, the combination of systematic and targeted biopsies proves most effective. Targeted biopsies rarely missed significant cancer for posterior PI-RADS 5 lesions, suggesting systematic biopsies could be reserved for instances where targeted biopsy results are negative. Advances in knowledge This study emphasizes on the efficacy of mpMRI and targeted biopsies in suspected prostate cancer in real-world clinical context. For PI-RADS 5 lesions, systematic biopsies provide limited clinical benefit and may only be necessary when targeted biopsy results are negative