Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2022 May 9.
Published in final edited form as: World J Urol. 2015 Feb 6;33(11):1669–1676. doi: 10.1007/s00345-015-1501-z

Table 4.

Impact of corresponding findings of TRUS in MR fusion targeted biopsy

TRUS highly suspicious (n = 52) TRUS likely (n = 67) TRUS unlikely (n = 8)

(a)
 MR highly suspicious (n = 50) 39 (78 %) 11 (22 %) 0 (0 %)
 MR likely (n = 77) 13 (17 %) 56 (73 %) 8 (10 %)
MR/TRUS fusion Targeted Biopsy

TRUS highly suspicious (n = 52) TRUS likely (n = 67) TRUS unlikely (n = 8) p value

(b)
 Positive rate per core 150/182 (82 %) 48/158 (30 %) 0/14 (0 %) <0.0001*
 Cancer core length, median (range) 8.6 mm (0–18) 5.3 mm (0–14) NA 0.01§
 Positive for any cancer 48/52 (92 %) 30/67 (45 %) 0/8 (0 %) <0.0001*
 Gleason score (6/7/8/9/10) 17/22/3/4/2 16/13/1/0/0 NA 0.3
Positive for significant prostate cancer 39/52 (75 %) 15/67 (22 %) NA <0.0001

p < 0.0001 (Spearman’s correlation coefficient by rank test)

TRUS trans-rectal ultrasound, MRI magnetic resonance imaging

*

Kruskal–Wallis Test

§

Mann–Whitney’s U test

Spearman’s correlation coefficient by rank test

Chi-square test