Status
Conditions
Treatments
About
Today, many centers still perform Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) cognitive prostate biopsy. The efficacy of detecting clinically significant prostate cancer, which is thought to be due to the experience of the urologist who performed the sampling and the difference in experience of the radiologists who performed the Multiparametric Prostate Magnetic Resonance (MPMR) evaluation, has been reported between 25% and 34% in the literature.
In order to eliminate this reporting and sampling difference, The goal of this interventional study is to compare the effectiveness of Multiparametric Prostate Magnetic Resonance (MPMR) Imaging routinely taken before biopsy with a single-center randomized and prospective study and prostate biopsies to be performed by the same urologist with the mapping technique created by a single genitourinary radiologist working in our center with standard cognitive prostate biopsy and to contribute to the literature Type of study: Clinical trial participant population: Male patients with elevated serum Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA) or indicated prostate biopsy by Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) imaging and underwent Multiparametric Prostate Magnetic Resonance (MPMR) before the procedure Participants will undergo transrectal prostate biopsy with or without mapping, Researches will compare to see if the cancer detection rates differ
Full description
In this preliminary clinical study, 200 patients who underwent cognitive prostate biopsy under the guidance of transrectal ultrasonography between 01.03.2023 and 01.09.2023 by Marmara University Department of Urology, Department of Urooncology due to serum Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA) elevation and/or abnormal rectal examination findings will be included in the study. All patients will undergo prostate biopsy under local or general anesthesia with transrectal ultrasonography by a single surgeon after mapping or report is extracted by a single genitourinary radiologist in the Department of Radiology of our hospital.
In the power analysis, 200 patients were included in the study with the prediction that the efficacy difference would be calculated as 5%. All patients will be randomized to two equal groups by the flip-flip method.
And then the biopsy results will be compared to see the efficacy of mapping
Enrollment
Sex
Ages
Volunteers
Inclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria
Primary purpose
Allocation
Interventional model
Masking
175 participants in 2 patient groups
Loading...
Central trial contact
Yunus Emre Genc, MD.
Data sourced from clinicaltrials.gov
Clinical trials
Research sites
Resources
Legal