Literature DB >> 17437438

Magnetic resonance imaging-directed transrectal ultrasonography-guided biopsies in patients at risk of prostate cancer.

Jean-Baptiste Lattouf1, Robert L Grubb, S Justin Lee, Marc A Bjurlin, Paul Albert, Anurag K Singh, Iclal Ocak, Peter Choyke, Jonathan A Coleman.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether using endorectal-coil magnetic resonance imaging (erMRI) before transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS)-guided biopsies of the prostate increases the yield of cancer in a high-risk population, and in a subset analysis to compare the yield with high-field (3 T) vs lower field (1.5 T) MRI. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between March 2003 and November 2005, 26 consecutive patients had erMRI before their TRUS biopsy of the prostate (median age 62 years, range 32-76). The median prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level was 8.40 (2.1-85.9) ng/mL. All patients had at least one previous negative prostate biopsy (median 3, range 1-12). Twenty-three patients had at least one risk factor for prostate cancer (family history, high PSA velocity, low percentage of free PSA, prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia or atypical small acinar proliferation on previous biopsy). MRI studies consisted of T2-weighted and dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) imaging studies.
RESULTS: There was a close correlation between T2-weighted and DCE images (85% agreement, P<0.001). Neither T2-weighted nor DCE imaging correlated with a higher yield for cancer on final biopsy (T2, positive predictive value, PPV, 20%, negative PV, NPV, 14%, P=0.21; DCE, PPV 21%, NPV 15%, P=0.26). Combining the two methods did not improve the cancer yield. There was no significant difference in the probability of cancer based on 1.5 T or 3 T imaging (17% vs 16%, P=0.88).
CONCLUSION: Although erMRI before TRUS-guided biopsies tended to give higher cancer yields the difference was not statistically significant. Reasons for this might include suboptimal localisation of the MRI findings and the biopsy location. Better methods for fusing MRI and TRUS images are presently being developed at our institution to allow more accurate targeting.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17437438     DOI: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2006.06690.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BJU Int        ISSN: 1464-4096            Impact factor:   5.588


  15 in total

Review 1.  MR-guided prostate interventions.

Authors:  Clare Tempany; Sarah Straus; Nobuhiko Hata; Steven Haker
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2008-02       Impact factor: 4.813

2.  Robotic image-guided needle interventions of the prostate.

Authors:  Pierre C Mozer; Alan W Partin; Dan Stoianovici
Journal:  Rev Urol       Date:  2009

3.  [The relevance of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for the detection and exclusion of prostate cancer].

Authors:  J Stattaus; M Forsting
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 0.639

4.  The Efficacy of Target Biopsy of Suspected Cancer Lesions Detected by Magnetic Resonance Imaging and/or Transrectal Ultrasonography during Initial Prostate Biopsies: Comparison of Outcomes between Two Physicians.

Authors:  Hideto Iwamoto; Tetsuya Yumioka; Noriya Yamaguchi; Seiya Inoue; Toshihiko Masago; Shuichi Morizane; Akihisa Yao; Masashi Honda; Takehiro Sejima; Atsushi Takenaka
Journal:  Yonago Acta Med       Date:  2014-04-28       Impact factor: 1.641

Review 5.  Advancements in MR imaging of the prostate: from diagnosis to interventions.

Authors:  David Bonekamp; Michael A Jacobs; Riham El-Khouli; Dan Stoianovici; Katarzyna J Macura
Journal:  Radiographics       Date:  2011 May-Jun       Impact factor: 5.333

Review 6.  Advancements in magnetic resonance-guided robotic interventions in the prostate.

Authors:  Katarzyna J Macura; Dan Stoianovici
Journal:  Top Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2008-12

7.  Robotic mechanical localization of prostate cancer correlates with magnetic resonance imaging scans.

Authors:  Tae Young Shin; Yeong Jin Kim; Sey Kiat Lim; Jung Kim; Koon Ho Rha
Journal:  Yonsei Med J       Date:  2013-07       Impact factor: 2.759

8.  Evaluation of T2-weighted and dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI in localizing prostate cancer before repeat biopsy.

Authors:  Alexandre Ben Cheikh; Nicolas Girouin; Marc Colombel; Jean-Marie Maréchal; Albert Gelet; Alvine Bissery; Muriel Rabilloud; Denis Lyonnet; Olivier Rouvière
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2008-10-17       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 9.  MRI-targeted prostate biopsy: a review of technique and results.

Authors:  Nicola L Robertson; Mark Emberton; Caroline M Moore
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2013-09-24       Impact factor: 14.432

10.  Repeat prostate biopsy strategies after initial negative biopsy: meta-regression comparing cancer detection of transperineal, transrectal saturation and MRI guided biopsy.

Authors:  Adam W Nelson; Rebecca C Harvey; Richard A Parker; Christof Kastner; Andrew Doble; Vincent J Gnanapragasam
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-02-27       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.