Ryeholder8947

Magnetic resonance/ ultrasound fusion targeted biopsy (Tbs) is widely used for diagnosing prostate cancer (PCa).The aim of our study was to compare the cancer detection rate (CDR) and the clinically significant prostate cancer detectionrate (csPCa) of the magnetic resonance/ultrasound fusion targeted biopsy with those of the standard systematic biopsy (Sbs)and of the combination of both techniques.

A total of 182 patients underwent magnetic resonance/ultrasound fusion Tbs on the prostate for PCa suspicion based on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mMRI)detection of lesions with PI-RADSv2 score ≥3. A total of 78 patients had prior negative biopsies. Tb was performed by taking2-4 cores from each suspected lesion, followed by Sb with 12 cores. We evaluated the overall detection rate of PCa andclinically significant prostate cancer, defined as any PCa with Gleason score ≥3+4.

Median prostate specific antigen(PSA) level pre-biopsy was 7.4 ng/ml and median free-PSA/PSA ratio was 10.2%. Patient median age was 62 years old. PIRADSv2score was 3 in 54 cases, 4 in 96 cases and 5 in 32 cases. PI-RADS-dependent detection rate of Tbs for scores 3, 4 and5 was 25.9%, 65.6% and 84.4%, respectively, with csPCa detection rates of 24.1%, 54.2%, and 71.9%. Overall detection ratewas 57.1% for Tbs, which increased to 60.4% by adding Sbs results. Detection rate for clinically significant prostate cancer(csPCa) was 48.4% and increased to 51.1% by adding Sbs. Overall detection rate for repeated biopsy was 50% and 68.3%for biopsy in naïve patients. Sbs detection rate was 55.5%, 8 patients having a negative biopsy on Tbs.

WhenTbs is considered due to a PI-RADS ≥3 lesion on mMRI, combined Tbs + Sbs increases the overall CDR and csPCa detectionrates.

When Tbs is considered due to a PI-RADS ≥3 lesion on mMRI, combined Tbs + Sbs increases the overall CDR and csPCa detection rates.A salivary incidentaloma (SI) stands for any focal salivary lesion, independent of size, discovered by any imaging method including ultrasonography (US), computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), multimodal positron emis-sion tomography (PET) combined with CT or MRI, or X-ray imaging, performed for another reason, in the absence of known salivary glands' disease. The article presents a detailed analysis of salivary gland diseases with the emphasis on neoplasms. It describes frequency of SIs found on imaging, their prevalence, epidemiology and clinical significance. The probability of malignancy or malignant transformation of a SI, its imaging features, recommended treatment, management and follow-up, as well as ethical issues, psychological burden, informed decision making, economical consequences and costs are discussed. The general prevalence of SIs is low, but is dramatically increasing over time, and may rise significantly in selected groups of oncologic patients. SIs most frequently turn out to be benign primary neoplasms or pseudotumors, including intraparenchymal lymph nodes. SIs detected by other imaging methods should be subsequently assessed with US. Solid SIs demand ultrasound guided fine-needle aspiration cytology (US-FNAC). Neoplasms should undergo surgery. Post-operative US follow-up is man-datory for malignant tumors and recommended for benign neoplasms.

To evaluate the pre-surgical diagnostic value of Multiparametric Ultrasound (MPUS) and Fine Needle Aspiration Cytology (FNAC) in differentiating parotid gland tumors, comparing the results with histology.

The study enrolled 84 patients with parotid gland lesions surgically treated in a single tertiary center and evaluated by MPUS. Each patient underwent FNAC. Histological examination was considered the gold standard.

Histology identified 62 benign tumors and 22 malignancies. In the differential diagnosis between malignant and benign lesions, B-mode Ultrasound (US), Color-Doppler US, Contrast-Enhanced US (CEUS), Elastography (USE) and FNAC showed the following values of sensitivity 82%, 81%, 86%, 77%, 73% respectively; specificity 97%, 61%, 95%, 71%, 97% respectively; PPV 90%, 43%, 86%, 50%, 89% respectively; NPV 93%, 90%, 95%, 88%, 91% respectively; and accuracy 89%, 71%, 90%, 78%, 84% re-spectively.

CEUS proved to be a valid and accurate method for identifying malignant tumors of parotid gland; the c valid alternative to FNAC.

Limited evidence on how to organize pre-patient training in Endoscopic Ultrasound (EUS) and how to evaluate its effect on knowledge and skills are available. The aim of our study was to assess the impact of a structured multi-site training program on EUS competence in Germany.

In a prospective study design, evaluation of 64 trainees was conducted during four three-day training courses with equal curricula at three sites. learn more Participants completed a structured pre- and post-test questionnaire consisting of 4 items to evaluate the relevance and acceptance of the training components (theoretical teaching, video sessions, live demonstration, hands-on experience) on a 5-point Likert scale, as well as a Likert scale to judge the self-rated improvement in EUS competence. To assess knowledge, 12 multiple choice (MC) questions had to be answered by all participants in a pre- and a post-test design. Also differences between beginners and advanced learners were analysed.

Overall evaluation on acceptance received above-average results with a median of 4 or 5 (IQR 1-2) on Likert scale (1=completely disagree, 5=completely agree). In the post-test self-rated EUS skills improved from 4 to 2 on the Likert scale (IQR=1, p=0.001, 1=excellent EUS skills, 5=no EUS skills). Results of the MC-test of all trainees showed significant improvement in theoretical knowledge from 7.9±1.9 to 8.8±1.9 points (mean±SD, p=0.001).

Our study provides arguments for the usefulness of a structured EUS training program resulting in a positive acceptance and high self-rated EUS competence by the participants and significant improvements in knowledge.

Our study provides arguments for the usefulness of a structured EUS training program resulting in a positive acceptance and high self-rated EUS competence by the participants and significant improvements in knowledge.