Structured micro‐ultrasonography training improves prostate cancer detection and management decisions

Objective To evaluate whether a structured 2‐day micro‐ultrasonography (microUS) training curriculum improves diagnostic performance and management decisions for clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) detection in novice readers. Subjects and Methods A total of 20 participants with limited microUS experience completed the Mannheim Micro‐Ultrasound Curriculum, comprising didactic modules, supervised case interpretation, and 85 reference cases. Pre‐ and post‐training performance was assessed on a fixed, biopsy confirmed test set of 100 cases (50 csPCa confirmed on radical prostatectomy, 50 biopsy negative). Each participant interpreted 10 randomised cases per timepoint, with no case assessed twice per reader and each case being assessed once before and after training in each training session. The primary endpoint was change in cohort‐level accuracy for csPCa detection; secondary endpoints included sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), Prostate Risk Identification using microUS (PRI‐MUS) performance, and management recommendations. Mixed‐effects models were applied as a robustness analysis. Results Training significantly improved pooled cohort level accuracy from 50.5% (95% confidence interval [CI] 43.4–57.6%) to 64.5% (95% CI 57.4–71.1%; P = 0.006), sensitivity from 70.0% (95% CI 60.0–78.8%) to 92.0% (95% CI 84.8–96.5%; P = 0.001), and negative predictive value from 50.8% (95% CI 37.7–63.9%) to 82.2% (95% CI 67.9–92.0%; P = 0.001), whereas specificity did not increase significantly (31.0% vs 37.0%; P = 0.46). The AUC for the overall subjective risk score rose from 0.53 (95% CI 0.45–0.61) to 0.70 (95% CI 0.63–0.77; P = 0.002). Mixed‐effects modelling confirmed a significant training effect (odds ratio 2.13, 95% CI 1.20–3.79; P = 0.01), reproducible across two independent sessions. PRI‐MUS scoring improvements were not statistically significant. Overall decision correctness improved from 67% to 83% ( P = 0.001), with poor‐quality decisions decreasing from 33% to 17%. Conclusion Structured image‐based microUS training significantly improved cohort‐level diagnostic performance and management decisions in novice readers in a controlled reader‐study. These findings support structured training and quality assurance before independent clinical implementation of microUS.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
British Journal of Urology
Published
2026-06-18
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.70360
Primary Topic
Prostate Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Structured micro‐ultrasonography training improves prostate cancer detection and management decisions

G. Baumann, Alexander Studier‐Fischer, Karl‐Friedrich Kowalewski, Sigrid Carlsson et al.
British Journal of Urology
Prostate Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
article

Structured micro‐ultrasonography training improves prostate cancer detection and management decisions

G. Baumann, Alexander Studier‐Fischer, Karl‐Friedrich Kowalewski, Sigrid Carlsson, Maurin Helen Mangold, Caelán Max Haney-Aubert, C B Christoph Brochhausen, Jiri Lehmberg, Maximilian Philip Wessendorf, Nektarios Winter, Johannes Jannik Braun, Maurice Stephan Michel
article en

Abstract

Objective To evaluate whether a structured 2‐day micro‐ultrasonography (microUS) training curriculum improves diagnostic performance and management decisions for clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) detection in novice readers. Subjects and Methods A total of 20 participants with limited microUS experience completed the Mannheim Micro‐Ultrasound Curriculum, comprising didactic modules, supervised case interpretation, and 85 reference cases. Pre‐ and post‐training performance was assessed on a fixed, biopsy confirmed test set of 100 cases (50 csPCa confirmed on radical prostatectomy, 50 biopsy negative). Each participant interpreted 10 randomised cases per timepoint, with no case assessed twice per reader and each case being assessed once before and after training in each training session. The primary endpoint was change in cohort‐level accuracy for csPCa detection; secondary endpoints included sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), Prostate Risk Identification using microUS (PRI‐MUS) performance, and management recommendations. Mixed‐effects models were applied as a robustness analysis. Results Training significantly improved pooled cohort level accuracy from 50.5% (95% confidence interval [CI] 43.4–57.6%) to 64.5% (95% CI 57.4–71.1%; P = 0.006), sensitivity from 70.0% (95% CI 60.0–78.8%) to 92.0% (95% CI 84.8–96.5%; P = 0.001), and negative predictive value from 50.8% (95% CI 37.7–63.9%) to 82.2% (95% CI 67.9–92.0%; P = 0.001), whereas specificity did not increase significantly (31.0% vs 37.0%; P = 0.46). The AUC for the overall subjective risk score rose from 0.53 (95% CI 0.45–0.61) to 0.70 (95% CI 0.63–0.77; P = 0.002). Mixed‐effects modelling confirmed a significant training effect (odds ratio 2.13, 95% CI 1.20–3.79; P = 0.01), reproducible across two independent sessions. PRI‐MUS scoring improvements were not statistically significant. Overall decision correctness improved from 67% to 83% ( P = 0.001), with poor‐quality decisions decreasing from 33% to 17%. Conclusion Structured image‐based microUS training significantly improved cohort‐level diagnostic performance and management decisions in novice readers in a controlled reader‐study. These findings support structured training and quality assurance before independent clinical implementation of microUS.

British Journal of Urology
German Cancer Research Center (DE), Lund University (SE), Heidelberg University (DE), DKFZ-ZMBH Alliance (DE), University Medical Centre Mannheim (DE)
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 7%
Prostate Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.