Literature DB >> 22462566

Role of transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS) in focal therapy of prostate cancer: report from a Consensus Panel.

Martijn Smeenge1, Jelle Barentsz, David Cosgrove, Jean de la Rosette, Theo de Reijke, Scott Eggener, Ferdinand Frauscher, Gyoergy Kovacs, Surena F Matin, Massimo Mischi, Peter Pinto, Ardeshir Rastinehad, Olivier Rouviere, Georg Salomon, Thomas Polascik, Jochen Walz, Hessel Wijkstra, Michael Marberger.   

Abstract

What's known on the subject? and What does the study add? Focal therapy techniques are emerging in prostate cancer treatment. However, several key questions about patient selection, treatment and monitoring still have to be addressed. The concept of focal therapy is barely discussed in current urological guidelines. In the present manuscript, we report the results of a consensus meeting focused on ultrasonography, the most common used urological imaging method, in relation to focal therapy of prostate cancer. • To establish a consensus on the utility of ultrasonography (US) to select patients for focal therapy. Topics were the current status of US to determine focality of prostate cancer, to monitor and assess outcome of focal therapy and the diagnostic advantages of new US methods. In addition, the biopsy techniques required to identify focal lesions were discussed. • Urological surgeons, radiation oncologists, radiologists, and basic researchers from Europe and North America participated in a consensus meeting on the use of transrectal US (TRUS) in focal therapy of prostate cancer. The consensus process was face-to-face and specific clinical issues were raised and discussed with agreement sought when possible. • TRUS is commonly used and essential for diagnosing men with prostate cancer. It is particularly useful for targeting specific anatomical regions or visible lesions. However, it has several limitations and there is a need for improvement. Newer visualisation techniques, e.g. colour Doppler US, contrast-enhanced US and elastography, are being developed but currently there is no US technique that can accurately characterise a cancer suitable for focal therapy. Systematic biopsy is the only known procedure that allows the identification of prostate cancers suitable for focal therapy. Scarce data exist about the role of US for monitoring patients during or after ablative therapy. • Consensus was reached on all key aspects of the meeting. • US cannot reliably identify focal prostate cancer. New US methods show promising results in identifying prostate cancer focality. • Currently selecting appropriate candidates for focal therapy should be performed using dedicated protocols and biopsy schemes.
© 2012 THE AUTHORS. BJU INTERNATIONAL © 2012 BJU INTERNATIONAL.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22462566     DOI: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2012.11072.x

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


  26 in total

Review 1.  Current trends and new frontiers in focal therapy for localized prostate cancer.

Authors:  Melissa H Mendez; Daniel Y Joh; Rajan Gupta; Thomas J Polascik
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2015-06       Impact factor: 3.092

2.  Multimodal Imaging in Focal Therapy Planning and Assessment in Primary Prostate Cancer.

Authors:  Hossein Jadvar
Journal:  Clin Transl Imaging       Date:  2017-04-10

3.  MRI-TRUS fusion for electrode positioning during irreversible electroporation for treatment of prostate cancer.

Authors:  Alexander D J Baur; Federico Collettini; Judith Enders; Andreas Maxeiner; Vera Schreiter; Carsten Stephan; Bernhard Gebauer; Bernd Hamm; Thomas Fischer
Journal:  Diagn Interv Radiol       Date:  2017 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 2.630

Review 4.  Imaging modalities in focal therapy: patient selection, treatment guidance, and follow-up.

Authors:  Berrend G Muller; Willemien van den Bos; Peter A Pinto; Jean J de la Rosette
Journal:  Curr Opin Urol       Date:  2014-05       Impact factor: 2.309

5.  A 12-year follow-up of ANNA/C-TRUS image-targeted biopsies in patients suspicious for prostate cancer.

Authors:  Theodoros Tokas; Björn Grabski; Udo Paul; Leif Bäurle; Tillmann Loch
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2017-12-23       Impact factor: 4.226

6.  Real time ultrasound molecular imaging of prostate cancer with PSMA-targeted nanobubbles.

Authors:  Reshani H Perera; Al de Leon; Xinning Wang; Yu Wang; Gopal Ramamurthy; Pubudu Peiris; Eric Abenojar; James P Basilion; Agata A Exner
Journal:  Nanomedicine       Date:  2020-04-26       Impact factor: 5.307

7.  [Importance of magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound-guided fusion biopsy for the detection and monitoring of prostate cancer].

Authors:  R Ganzer; W Brummeisl; F S Siokou; R Scheck; T Franz; P Ho-Thi; A Mangold
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2019-12       Impact factor: 0.639

Review 8.  Prostate cancer detection and diagnosis: the role of MR and its comparison with other diagnostic modalities--a radiologist's perspective.

Authors:  Tobias Penzkofer; Clare M Tempany-Afdhal
Journal:  NMR Biomed       Date:  2013-09-03       Impact factor: 4.044

9.  The role of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in focal therapy for prostate cancer: recommendations from a consensus panel.

Authors:  Berrend G Muller; Jurgen J Fütterer; Rajan T Gupta; Aaron Katz; Alexander Kirkham; John Kurhanewicz; Judd W Moul; Peter A Pinto; Ardeshir R Rastinehad; Cary Robertson; Jean de la Rosette; Rafael Sanchez-Salas; J Stephen Jones; Osamu Ukimura; Sadhna Verma; Hessel Wijkstra; Michael Marberger
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2013-11-13       Impact factor: 5.588

Review 10.  Prostate focused ultrasound focal therapy--imaging for the future.

Authors:  Olivier Rouvière; Albert Gelet; Sébastien Crouzet; Jean-Yves Chapelon
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2012-08-21       Impact factor: 66.675

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.