Why and Where do We Miss Significant Prostate Cancer with Multi-parametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging followed by Magnetic Resonance-guided and Transrectal Ultrasound-guided Biopsy in Biopsy-naive Men?

Background: Knowledge of significant prostate (sPCa) locations being missed with magnetic resonance (MR)- and transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided biopsy (Bx) may help to improve these techniques. Objective: To identify the location of sPCa lesions being missed with MR- and TRUS-Bx. Design, setting, and participants: In a referral center, 223 consecutive Bx-naive men with elevated prostate specific antigen level and/or abnormal digital rectal examination were included. Histopathologically-proven cancer locations, Gleason score, and tumor length were determined. Intervention: All patients underwent multi-parametric MRI and 12-core systematic TRUS-Bx. MR-Bx was performed in all patients with suspicion of PCa on multi-parametric MRI (n = 142). Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: Cancer locations were compared between MR-and TRUS-Bx. Proportions were expressed as percentages, and the corresponding 95% confidence intervals were calculated. Results and limitations: In total, 191 lesions were found in 108 patients with sPCa. From these lesion 74% (141/191) were defined as sPCa on either MR- or TRUS-Bx. MR-Bx detected 74% (105/141) of these lesions and 61% (86/141) with TRUS-Bx. TRUS-Bx detected more lesions compared with MR-Bx (140 vs 109). However, these lesions were often low risk (39%). Significant lesions missed with MR-Bx most often had involvement of dorsolateral (58%) and apical (37%) segments and missed segments with TRUS-Bx were located anteriorly (79%), anterior midprostate (50%), and anterior apex (23%). Conclusions: Both techniques have difficulties in detecting apical lesions. MR-Bx most often missed cancer with involvement of the dorsolateral part (58%) and TRUS-Bx with involvement of the anterior part (79%). Patient summary: Both biopsy techniques miss cancer in specific locations within the prostate. Identification of these lesions may help to improve these techniques. (C) 2016 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.