Connect
MRI fusion biopsy or nah?
Hi - I posted earlier about a spike in my PSA over one month from 4.7 to 10.7. I had an MRI done and they noted a PI RADS 3 lesion without noted bone or lymph node pathology. The local urology group wants to biopsy it - and that’s fine - but doesn’t have MRI fusion technology. The clinician who is an experienced guy said there’s a paper out there that says that the incremental benefit of the fusion biopsy vs the traditional ultrasound transrectal biopsy done by an experienced practitioner is very marginal. Of course this is a little self serving. I can likely drive a few hours and have state of the art at a UC urology center. Is it worth the drive or is he generally correct?
Like
Helpful
HugInterested in more discussions like this? Go to the Prostate Cancer Support Group.
Connect
FWIT, I add my support to the "travel for Fusion Biopsy" suggestions.
Your biopsy will be be a very important test result and I would want, and I received, the Fusion Biopsy.
Best wishes.
-
Like -
Helpful -
Hug
1 Reaction@jcf58 my husband had the MRI fusion biopsy done and all that was on the report were 7 cores taken. 3 were positive for cancer and 4 were negative. Did they take enough cores?
I am not a medical expert, but that seems a bit low. Most biopsies are at least 12 cores. My biopsy after an MRI show the lesion,,was 18 cores. Six in the area where they could see the lesion and then 12 random.
-
Like -
Helpful -
Hug
2 Reactions@jneylon
The usual standard is that they take 12 cores. There’s a good reason for it. Frequently the cancer is not in the spots where they found something in an MRI, So taking more cores in different spots can find cancer that is not found by that MRI.
-
Like -
Helpful -
Hug
1 Reaction@jneylon
I had 14 cores taken when I got the biopsy done in June. I had a biopsy done four years earlier and it was 12 cores.