PURPOSE: To examine the feasibility and safety of magnetic resonance (MR)-guided biopsy by using a transgluteal approach in patients with suspicious prostate lesions by using an MR-compatible robotic system and a 1.5-T MR system. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study was approved by the institutional review board of University Frankfurt, and informed consent was obtained from each patient. A total of 20 patients (age range, 57.8-71.9 years; mean age, 65.1 years) underwent biopsy in a closed-bore high-field-strength MR system. Biopsy was performed with an MR-compatible pneumatically driven robotic system. T1-weighted gradient-echo fast low-angle shot and T2-weighted true fast imaging with steady-state precession sequences were used to plan and guide the intervention with a transgluteal access on the external planning computer of the assistance system. The system calculated the trajectory and then moved the guiding arm to the insertion point. The cannula was advanced manually, and biopsies were performed with the coaxial technique by using a 15-gauge pencil tip needle. Intervention time, complications, and biopsy findings were documented. RESULTS: The MR-compatible robotic system did not interfere with image quality, nor did MR imaging cause dysfunction of the robot. In one patient, the interventionist caused a fail-safe system shutdown. This was due to inadvertent displacement of the guiding arm during cannula insertion. This problem was solved by increasing the displacement threshold. Accurate coaxial cannula biopsy could be performed in all subsequent patients. Sufficient histopathologic assessment was performed in 19 patients. Insufficient material was retrieved in the patient who experienced fail-safe system shutdown. The median intervention time was 39 minutes (23-65 minutes). No procedure-related complications were observed. CONCLUSION: Preliminary results indicate that MR-guided robot-assisted biopsy is feasible and can be performed safely with highly accurate cannula placement. RSNA, 2011
PURPOSE: To examine the feasibility and safety of magnetic resonance (MR)-guided biopsy by using a transgluteal approach in patients with suspicious prostate lesions by using an MR-compatible robotic system and a 1.5-T MR system. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study was approved by the institutional review board of University Frankfurt, and informed consent was obtained from each patient. A total of 20 patients (age range, 57.8-71.9 years; mean age, 65.1 years) underwent biopsy in a closed-bore high-field-strength MR system. Biopsy was performed with an MR-compatible pneumatically driven robotic system. T1-weighted gradient-echo fast low-angle shot and T2-weighted true fast imaging with steady-state precession sequences were used to plan and guide the intervention with a transgluteal access on the external planning computer of the assistance system. The system calculated the trajectory and then moved the guiding arm to the insertion point. The cannula was advanced manually, and biopsies were performed with the coaxial technique by using a 15-gauge pencil tip needle. Intervention time, complications, and biopsy findings were documented. RESULTS: The MR-compatible robotic system did not interfere with image quality, nor did MR imaging cause dysfunction of the robot. In one patient, the interventionist caused a fail-safe system shutdown. This was due to inadvertent displacement of the guiding arm during cannula insertion. This problem was solved by increasing the displacement threshold. Accurate coaxial cannula biopsy could be performed in all subsequent patients. Sufficient histopathologic assessment was performed in 19 patients. Insufficient material was retrieved in the patient who experienced fail-safe system shutdown. The median intervention time was 39 minutes (23-65 minutes). No procedure-related complications were observed. CONCLUSION: Preliminary results indicate that MR-guided robot-assisted biopsy is feasible and can be performed safely with highly accurate cannula placement. RSNA, 2011
Authors: Ashwin N Sridhar; Archie Hughes-Hallett; Erik K Mayer; Philip J Pratt; Philip J Edwards; Guang-Zhong Yang; Ara W Darzi; Justin A Vale Journal: Nat Rev Urol Date: 2013-06-18 Impact factor: 14.432
Authors: Niravkumar A Patel; Christopher J Nycz; Paulo A Carvalho; Katie Y Gandomi; Radian Gondokaryono; Gang Li; Tamas Heffter; Everette Clif Burdette; Julie G Pilitsis; Gregory S Fischer Journal: IEEE Trans Biomed Eng Date: 2020-02-17 Impact factor: 4.538
Authors: Boris Schulz; Katrin Eichler; Petra Siebenhandl; Tatjana Gruber-Rouh; Christoph Czerny; Thomas Josef Vogl; Stephan Zangos Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2012-07-21 Impact factor: 5.315
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