ArticleBJUI compass2024
Multiparametric-magnetic resonance imaging (mp-MRI) of the prostate and Urolift: Identifying artefact size, location and clinical implications.
Article in BJUI compass, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Multi-Center, Real-World Registry Study of the UroLift Prostatic Urethral Lift (PUL) for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia (BPH) in Japan.International journal of urology : official journal of the Japanese Urological Association · 2026Article
- Erratum.BJUI compass · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issuedErratum.2024
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: We sought to define the degree of artefact caused by prostatic urethral lift (PUL) on multiparametric-magnetic resonance imaging (mp-MRI) to determine the location, size of artefact and if the device could potentially obscure a diagnosis of prostate cancer. Methods: Ten patients were prospectively enrolled to undergo PUL for treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia and follow-up imaging. A standard mp-MRI protocol using a 3.0 Tesla scanner was performed prior to and following Urolift insertion. Pre- and post-PUL images were compared to measure maximum artefact diameter around each implant in each MRI parameter. A transverse relaxation time weighted (T2) artefact reduction protocol was also evaluated. The location of each artefact was then compared to a separate database of 225 consecutive patients who underwent magnetic resonance guided prostate biopsies. Results: Artefact occurred around the stainless steel urethral implant component only. Mean T2 artefact maximum diameter was 7.7 mm (sd = 1.71 mm), with an artefact reduction protocol reducing this to 5.4 mm (sd = 1.43). Mean dynamic-contrast-enhancement artefact was 10 mm (sd = 2.5 mm), and mean diffusion-weighted-imaging artefact was 28.2 mm (sd = 7.8 mm). All artefacts were confined to the posterior transition zone only. In the 225 consecutive patients who had undergone magnetic resonance guided prostate biopsies, there were 55 positive biopsies with prostate cancer, with 13 cases found in the transition zones and no cancer identified solely in the posterior transitional zone. Conclusions: The stainless steel urethral component of the PUL does cause artefact, which is confined to the posterior transition zone only. PUL artefact occurs in an area of the prostate that has a very low incidence of a single focus of prostate cancer. If there is concern for prostate cancer in the posterior TZ (e.g. if every other area is clear with a high PSA), this area can undergo targeted biopsy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.