Diskussion:HistoScanning

Funktionsweise

Leider wird nicht erklärt, wie denn die zusätzliche Bildinformation zustande kommt. Was wird farblich markiert? Wie kommt der Computer zum Schluss, dieses Gewebe zu markieren und kein anderes? --Drahreg•01 22:46, 24. Mär. 2013 (CET)

Histoscanning enttäuscht in aktuellen großen Studien

Schiffmann et al: World J Urol. 2014 Aug;32(4):925-30. doi: 10.1007/s00345-014-1330-5. Epub 2014 May 29. Does HistoScanning™ predict positive results in prostate biopsy? A retrospective analysis of 1,188 sextants of the prostate.

RESULTS: Overall, 198 men were identified and 1,188 sextants were analyzed. The AUC to predict positive biopsy results by HS was 0.58. Sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV for HS to predict positive biopsy results per sextant, depending on different HS signal volume cutoffs (>0, >0.2 and >0.5 ml) were 84.1, 27.7, 29.5 and 82.9 %, 60.9, 50.6, 28.8 and 79.7 %, and 40.1, 73.3, 33.1 and 78.8 %, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS: Positive HS signals do not accurately predict positive prostate biopsy results according to sextant analysis. We cannot recommend a variation of well-established random biopsy patterns or reduction of biopsy cores in accordance with HS signals at the moment.

Javed et al: BJU Int. 2014 Oct;114(4):541-8. doi: 10.1111/bju.12568. Epub 2014 Mar 20. Does prostate HistoScanning™ play a role in detecting prostate cancer in routine clinical practice? Results from three independent studies.

RESULTS: The PHS-targeted biopsies had an overall cancer detection rate of 38.1%, compared with 62.5% with standard TRUS-guided biopsies. The sensitivity and specificity of PHS for localizing tumour to the correct prostate sextant, compared with standard TRUS-guided biopsies, were 100 and 5.9%, respectively. The PHS-targeted biopsies had an overall cancer detection rate of 13.4% compared with 54.4% for standard TTB. PHS had a sensitivity and specificity for cancer detection in the posterior gland of 100 and 13%, respectively, and for the anterior gland, 6 and 82%, respectively. We found no correlation between total tumour volume estimates from PHS and radical prostatectomy pathology (Pearson correlation coefficient -0.096). Sensitivity and specificity of PHS for detecting tumour foci ≥0.2 mL in volume were 63 and 53%.

CONCLUSIONS: These three independent studies in 105 patients suggest that PHS does not reliably identify and characterize prostate cancer in the routine clinical setting. (nicht signierter Beitrag von 84.56.10.64 (Diskussion) 17:47, 18. Jan. 2015 (CET))