{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03961748633879782, 'fraction_numerical': 0.030737704918032786, 'mean_word_length': 4.931174089068826, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 2, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Real life data of MRI-targeted biopsy – experience from a single nonacademic centre using cognitive fusion and 1.5 tesla scanning

Abstract Objectives To date, it is unknown whether systematic biopsies can be safely omitted in patients with unsuspicious MRI findings or if systematic biopsies should be required when targeting focal lesions (PI-RADS 3–5). Methods A series of 366 patients (249 without a previous biopsy) were examined in a 1.5 Tesla MRI scanner. All patients were submitted to systematic biopsies (12–14 regions) with additional targeted biopsies (by cognitive fusion) of focal PI-RADS lesions (PI-RADS 3–5). Results In our series, patients with PI-RADS 1/2 findings had rates of adenocarcinoma of any grade, >GG1 and GG4/5 of 34%, 14% and 3%, respectively. The use of MRI prior to biopsy in our series increased the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer (CSPCa) in 28% of patients with focal lesions, and focal lesions were present in 293/366 (80%) of all patients. For CSPCa (>GG1), targeted biopsies improved the diagnosis in 28% of patients, while systematic biopsies resulted in an additional 19% of cancer cases in the series. Conclusion Systematic biopsies should still be considered in patients with PI-RADS 1/2 findings. Our findings also suggest a stronger benefit of the combined strategy of targeted and systematic biopsies than the findings of previous studies concerning the detection of CSPCa in biopsy-naïve patients.