Literature DB >> 19752886

Prostate cancer detection using an extended prostate biopsy schema in combination with additional targeted cores from suspicious images in conventional and functional endorectal magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate.

A P Labanaris1, K Engelhard, V Zugor, R Nützel, R Kühn.   

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to report our method in detecting prostate cancer (PCa) using an 18-core transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) prostate biopsy (PB) schema, in combination with additional targeted cores from suspicious images in conventional (e-cMRI) and functional (e-fMRI) endorectal magnetic resonance imaging (e-MRI) of the prostate. From 2004 to 2008, 260 consecutive patients with a clinical suspicion of PCa underwent PB and were prospectively studied. e-cMRI and e-fMRI was performed in all patients before PB. The patients were divided into two groups (A and B) according to the results of their radiological findings (group A=suspicious findings, group B=non-suspicious findings). After the images were processed, an 18-core TRUS-guided PB was performed. When a patient exhibited a suspicious site on e-cMRI and e-fMRI images, three additional targeted PBs were obtained from that site. In group A, 17.5% of PCa was detected by the 18-core PB and 56.5% of PCa was detected by the targeted cores. The overall PCa detection rate (18+targeted cores) was 73.9%. The overall specificity was 73.9%. In group B, overall false-positive detection rate reached 19.2%, with the overall sensitivity being 80.8%. The method described above is not only practical but also a promising modality in PCa detection. As seen, PCa was optimally detected when combining the 18-core and targeted-core PB schema together. Non-suspicious images do not rule out the probability of PCa, thus justifying a PB in these patients as well.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19752886     DOI: 10.1038/pcan.2009.41

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis        ISSN: 1365-7852            Impact factor:   5.554


  24 in total

Review 1.  Anatomic and Molecular Imaging in Prostate Cancer.

Authors:  Eric T Miller; Amirali Salmasi; Robert E Reiter
Journal:  Cold Spring Harb Perspect Med       Date:  2018-03-01       Impact factor: 6.915

Review 2.  Optimization of prostate biopsy: the role of magnetic resonance imaging targeted biopsy in detection, localization and risk assessment.

Authors:  Marc A Bjurlin; Xiaosong Meng; Julien Le Nobin; James S Wysock; Herbert Lepor; Andrew B Rosenkrantz; Samir S Taneja
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2014-04-21       Impact factor: 7.450

Review 3.  [Fusion imaging in urology: combination of MRI and TRUS for detection of prostate cancer].

Authors:  D Schilling; M Kurosch; R Mager; I Tsaur; A Haferkamp; M Röthke
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2013-04       Impact factor: 0.639

Review 4.  Comparison of image-guided targeted biopsies versus systematic randomized biopsies in the detection of prostate cancer: a systematic literature review of well-designed studies.

Authors:  Antoine van Hove; Pierre-Henri Savoie; Charlotte Maurin; Serge Brunelle; Gwenaëlle Gravis; Naji Salem; Jochen Walz
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2014-06-12       Impact factor: 4.226

5.  Fully Automated Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Transrectal Ultrasound Fusion via a Probabilistic Registration Metric.

Authors:  Rachel Sparks; B Nicolas Bloch; Ernest Feleppa; Dean Barratt; Anant Madabhushi
Journal:  Proc SPIE Int Soc Opt Eng       Date:  2013-03-08

Review 6.  Magnetic resonance-ultrasound fusion prostate biopsy in the diagnosis of prostate cancer.

Authors:  Mark D Tyson; Sandeep S Arora; Kristen R Scarpato; Daniel Barocas
Journal:  Urol Oncol       Date:  2016-04-12       Impact factor: 3.498

Review 7.  Value of multiparametric MRI in the work-up of prostate cancer.

Authors:  F Cornud; N B Delongchamps; P Mozer; F Beuvon; A Schull; N Muradyan; M Peyromaure
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2012-02       Impact factor: 3.092

8.  Magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion biopsy for prediction of final prostate pathology.

Authors:  Jesse D Le; Samuel Stephenson; Michelle Brugger; David Y Lu; Patricia Lieu; Geoffrey A Sonn; Shyam Natarajan; Frederick J Dorey; Jiaoti Huang; Daniel J A Margolis; Robert E Reiter; Leonard S Marks
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2014-05-01       Impact factor: 7.450

Review 9.  Current status of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and ultrasonography fusion software platforms for guidance of prostate biopsies.

Authors:  Jennifer K Logan; Soroush Rais-Bahrami; Baris Turkbey; Andrew Gomella; Hayet Amalou; Peter L Choyke; Bradford J Wood; Peter A Pinto
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2014-05-22       Impact factor: 5.588

10.  Diagnosis of relevant prostate cancer using supplementary cores from magnetic resonance imaging-prompted areas following multiple failed biopsies.

Authors:  Daniel N Costa; B Nicolas Bloch; David F Yao; Martin G Sanda; Long Ngo; Elizabeth M Genega; Ivan Pedrosa; William C DeWolf; Neil M Rofsky
Journal:  Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2013-04-18       Impact factor: 2.546

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.