Article Sidebar

PDF (Tiếng Việt)
Published: 2023-12-15
Abstract Views: 128
Views PDF (Tiếng Việt): 132
DOI: https://doi.org/10.52852/tcncyh.v171i10.2019
Issue
Vol. 171 No. 10 (2023)
Section
Các bài báo
How to Cite
Mai, H. T. N., Hương, N. T., Hưng, N. V., Minh, T. N., & Khuy, Đoàn M. . (2023). 18. Comparative analysis of histopathology of prostate hyperplasia and carcinoma with PSA density, PIRADS on MRI. Journal of Medical Research, 171(10), 158-165. https://doi.org/10.52852/tcncyh.v171i10.2019

18. Comparative analysis of histopathology of prostate hyperplasia and carcinoma with PSA density, PIRADS on MRI

Hoang Thi Ngoc Mai, Nguyen Thuy Huong, Nguyen Van Hung, Tran Ngoc Minh, Doan Minh Khuy

Main Article Content

Abstract




The study aimed to compare the histopathological characteristics of benign prostatic hyperplasia and prostate carcinoma with PSA level and PIRADS on prostate MRI. This descriptive study on 74 patients showed 41 hyperplasia (median age 63.6) and 33 carcinoma (median age 68.2). In the group with carcinoma, high Gleason score 8 - 10 is 39.4%, Gleason score 6 - 7 is 60.6%. The high serum PSA level is associated with high rate of carcinoma and high Gleason histological score (p < 0.05). PIRADS 4 - 5 in the prostate carcinoma group is 97%, in prostatic hyperplasia group is 22% (p < 0.001). In the patients with cancer, PIRADS 5 in Gleason 8 - 10 group is 100%.




Article Details

Keywords

Hyperplasia, prostate carcinoma, PIRADS, PSA

References

1. US Preventive Services Task Force, Grossman DC, Curry SJ, et al. Screening for Prostate Cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement. JAMA. 2018;319(18):1901-1913. doi:10.1001/ jama.2018.3710
2. Rajaei M, Momeni A, Kheiri S, et al. Effect of ejaculation on serum prostate specific antigen level in screening and non-screening population. J Res Med Sci. 2013;18(5):387- 390.
3. Catalona WJ, Richie JP, Ahmann FR, et al. Comparison of digital rectal examination and serum prostate specific antigen in the early detection of prostate cancer: results of a multicenter clinical trial of 6,630 men. J Urol. 1994;151(5):1283-1290. doi:10.1016/s0022-53 47(17)35233-3
4. Tabayoyong W, Abouassaly R. Prostate Cancer Screening and the Associated Controversy. Surg Clin North Am. 2015;95(5):1023-1039. doi:10.1016/j. suc.2015.05.001
5. Tamada T, Sone T, Higashi H, et al. Prostate cancer detection in patients with total serum prostate-specific antigen levels of 4 - 10 ng/mL: diagnostic efficacy of diffusion- weighted imaging, dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI, and T2-weighted imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2011;197(3):664-670. doi:10.2214/ AJR.10.5923
6. Baruah SK, Das N, Baruah SJ, et al. Combining Prostate-Specific Antigen Parameters With Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Score Version 2.0 to Improve Its Diagnostic Accuracy. World J Oncol. 2019;10(6):218-225. doi:10.14740/wjon1230
7. Alizadeh M, Alizadeh S. Survey of clinical and pathological characteristics and outcomes of patients with prostate cancer. Glob J Health Sci. 2014;6(7 Spec No):49-57. doi:10.5539/gj hs.v6n7p49
8. Pettersson A, Robinson D, Garmo H, et al. Age at diagnosis and prostate cancer treatment and prognosis: a population-based cohort study. Ann Oncol. 2018;29(2):377-385. doi:10.1093/annonc/mdx742
9. Lu YF, Zhang Q, Chen HY, et al. Improving the detection rate of prostate cancer in the gray zone of PI-RADS v2 and serum tPSA by using prostate-specific antigen-age volume. Medicine (Baltimore). 2019;98(26):e16289. doi:10.1097/ MD.0000000000016289
10. Catalona WJ, Smith DS, Ornstein DK. Prostate cancer detection in men with serum PSA concentrations of 2.6 to 4.0 ng/mL and benign prostate examination. Enhancement of specificity with free PSA measurements. JAMA. 1997;277(18):1452-1455.
11. Kanno T, Shibasaki N, Tsuji Y, et al. Prostate cancer detection by prostate biopsy among Japanese with prostate-specific antigen below 4.0 ng/ml. Hinyokika Kiyo. 2006;52(3):181-184.
12. Jones JS, ed. Prostate Cancer Diagnosis: PSA, Biopsy and Beyond. Humana Press; 2013. doi:10.1007/978-1-62703-188-2
13. Stolk TT, de Jong IJ, Kwee TC, et al. False positives in PIRADS (V2) 3, 4, and 5 lesions: relationship with reader experience and zonal location. Abdom Radiol (NY). 2019;44(3):1044-1051. doi:10.1007/s00261- 019-01919-2
14. Kızılay F, Çelik S, Sözen S, et al. Correlation of Prostate-Imaging Reporting and Data Scoring System scoring on multiparametric prostate magnetic resonance imaging with histopathological factors in radical prostatectomy material in Turkish prostate cancer patients: a multicenter study of the Urooncology Association. Prostate Int. 2020;8(1):10-15. doi:10.1016/j.prnil.2020.01.001
15. Alqahtani S, Wei C, Zhang Y, et al. Prediction of prostate cancer Gleason score upgrading from biopsy to radical prostatectomy using pre-biopsy multiparametric MRI PIRADS scoring system. Sci Rep. 2020;10(1):7722. doi:10.1038/s41598-020-64693-y
16. Röthke M, Blondin D, Schlemmer HP, et al. PI-RADS classification: structured reporting for MRI of the prostate. Rofo. 2013;185(3):253- 261. doi:10.1055/s-0032-1330270
17. Westphalen AC, Fazel F, Nguyen H, et al. Detection of clinically signifi cant prostate cancer with PIRADS v2 scores, PSA density, and ADC values in regions with and without mpMRI visible lesions. Int Braz J Urol. 2019;45(4):713-723. doi:10.1590/S1677-5538. IBJU.2018.0768