Literature DB >> 23083875

Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasound fusion biopsy detect prostate cancer in patients with prior negative transrectal ultrasound biopsies.

Srinivas Vourganti1, Ardeshir Rastinehad1, Nitin Yerram1, Jeffrey Nix1, Dmitry Volkin1, An Hoang1, Baris Turkbey2, Gopal N Gupta1, Jochen Kruecker3, W Marston Linehan1, Peter L Choyke2, Bradford J Wood4, Peter A Pinto1,4.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Patients with negative transrectal ultrasound biopsies and a persistent clinical suspicion are at risk for occult but significant prostate cancer. The ability of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound fusion biopsy to detect these occult prostate lesions may make it an effective tool in this challenging scenario.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between March 2007 and November 2011 all men underwent prostate 3 T endorectal coil magnetic resonance imaging. All concerning lesions were targeted with magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound fusion biopsy. In addition, all patients underwent standard 12-core transrectal ultrasound biopsy. Men with 1 or more negative systematic prostate biopsies were included in our cohort.
RESULTS: Of the 195 men with previous negative biopsies, 73 (37%) were found to have cancer using the magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound fusion biopsy combined with 12-core transrectal ultrasound biopsy. High grade cancer (Gleason score 8+) was discovered in 21 men (11%), all of whom had disease detected with magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound fusion biopsy. However, standard transrectal ultrasound biopsy missed 12 of these high grade cancers (55%). Pathological upgrading occurred in 28 men (38.9%) as a result of magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound fusion targeting vs standard transrectal ultrasound biopsy. The diagnostic yield of combined magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound fusion platform was unrelated to the number of previous negative biopsies and persisted despite increasing the number of previous biopsy sessions. On multivariate analysis only prostate specific antigen density and magnetic resonance imaging suspicion level remained significant predictors of cancer.
CONCLUSIONS: Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging with a magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound fusion biopsy platform is a novel diagnostic tool for detecting prostate cancer and may be ideally suited for patients with negative transrectal ultrasound biopsies in the face of a persistent clinical suspicion for cancer.
Copyright © 2012 American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 23083875      PMCID: PMC3895467          DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2012.08.025

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Urol        ISSN: 0022-5347            Impact factor:   7.450


  14 in total

1.  Prostate cancer diagnosis using a saturation needle biopsy technique after previous negative sextant biopsies.

Authors:  C S Stewart; B C Leibovich; A L Weaver; M M Lieber
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2001-07       Impact factor: 7.450

2.  Multiparametric 3T prostate magnetic resonance imaging to detect cancer: histopathological correlation using prostatectomy specimens processed in customized magnetic resonance imaging based molds.

Authors:  Baris Turkbey; Haresh Mani; Vijay Shah; Ardeshir R Rastinehad; Marcelino Bernardo; Thomas Pohida; Yuxi Pang; Dagane Daar; Compton Benjamin; Yolanda L McKinney; Hari Trivedi; Celene Chua; Gennady Bratslavsky; Joanna H Shih; W Marston Linehan; Maria J Merino; Peter L Choyke; Peter A Pinto
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2011-09-25       Impact factor: 7.450

3.  Systematic transperineal ultrasound-guided template biopsy of the prostate: three-year experience.

Authors:  David M Pinkstaff; Todd C Igel; Steven P Petrou; Gregory A Broderick; Michael J Wehle; Paul R Young
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2005-04       Impact factor: 2.649

4.  Serial biopsy results in prostate cancer screening study.

Authors:  Kimberly A Roehl; Jo Ann V Antenor; William J Catalona
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2002-06       Impact factor: 7.450

5.  Use of extended systematic sampling in patients with a prior negative prostate needle biopsy.

Authors:  Chris H Chon; Frank C Lai; John E McNeal; Joseph C Presti
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2002-06       Impact factor: 7.450

6.  Magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound fusion guided prostate biopsy improves cancer detection following transrectal ultrasound biopsy and correlates with multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  Peter A Pinto; Paul H Chung; Ardeshir R Rastinehad; Angelo A Baccala; Jochen Kruecker; Compton J Benjamin; Sheng Xu; Pingkun Yan; Samuel Kadoury; Celene Chua; Julia K Locklin; Baris Turkbey; Joanna H Shih; Stacey P Gates; Carey Buckner; Gennady Bratslavsky; W Marston Linehan; Neil D Glossop; Peter L Choyke; Bradford J Wood
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2011-08-17       Impact factor: 7.450

7.  Three-Tesla magnetic resonance-guided prostate biopsy in men with increased prostate-specific antigen and repeated, negative, random, systematic, transrectal ultrasound biopsies: detection of clinically significant prostate cancers.

Authors:  Caroline M A Hoeks; Martijn G Schouten; Joyce G R Bomers; Stefan P Hoogendoorn; Christina A Hulsbergen-van de Kaa; Thomas Hambrock; Henk Vergunst; J P Michiel Sedelaar; Jurgen J Fütterer; Jelle O Barentsz
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2012-02-01       Impact factor: 20.096

8.  Validation of a nomogram for predicting positive repeat biopsy for prostate cancer.

Authors:  Brent V Yanke; Mithat Gonen; Peter T Scardino; Michael W Kattan
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 7.450

9.  Prostate cancer detection with office based saturation biopsy in a repeat biopsy population.

Authors:  John C Rabets; J Stephen Jones; Amit Patel; Craig D Zippe
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2004-07       Impact factor: 7.450

10.  Prostate specific antigen density versus prostate specific antigen slope as predictors of prostate cancer in men with initially negative prostatic biopsies.

Authors:  D W Keetch; J M McMurtry; D S Smith; G L Andriole; W J Catalona
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  1996-08       Impact factor: 7.450

View more
  81 in total

Review 1.  Transperineal biopsy of the prostate--is this the future?

Authors:  Dwayne T S Chang; Benjamin Challacombe; Nathan Lawrentschuk
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2013-09-24       Impact factor: 14.432

2.  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

3.  [Multiparametric MRI and MRI-TRUS fusion biopsy in patients with prior negative prostate biopsy].

Authors:  C Kesch; J P Radtke; F Distler; S Boxler; T Klein; C Hüttenbrink; K Hees; W Roth; M Roethke; H P Schlemmer; M Hohenfellner; B A Hadaschik
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2016-08       Impact factor: 0.639

Review 4.  Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Ultrasound Fusion-Guided Prostate Biopsy: Review of Technology, Techniques, and Outcomes.

Authors:  Michael Kongnyuy; Arvin K George; Ardeshir R Rastinehad; Peter A Pinto
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2016-04       Impact factor: 3.092

Review 5.  Prostate biopsy for the interventional radiologist.

Authors:  Cheng William Hong; Hayet Amalou; Sheng Xu; Baris Turkbey; Pingkun Yan; Jochen Kruecker; Peter A Pinto; Peter L Choyke; Bradford J Wood
Journal:  J Vasc Interv Radiol       Date:  2014-02-26       Impact factor: 3.464

6.  Fusion prostate biopsy outperforms 12-core systematic prostate biopsy in patients with prior negative systematic biopsy: A multi-institutional analysis.

Authors:  Abhinav Sidana; Matthew J Watson; Arvin K George; Ardeshir R Rastinehad; Srinivas Vourganti; Soroush Rais-Bahrami; Akhil Muthigi; Mahir Maruf; Jennifer B Gordetsky; Jeffrey W Nix; Maria J Merino; Baris Turkbey; Peter L Choyke; Bradford J Wood; Peter A Pinto
Journal:  Urol Oncol       Date:  2018-05-10       Impact factor: 3.498

7.  Role of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of prostate cancer.

Authors:  Soroush Rais-Bahrami; Baris Turkbey; Kinzya B Grant; Peter A Pinto; Peter L Choyke
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2014-03       Impact factor: 3.092

Review 8.  Restriction spectrum imaging: An evolving imaging biomarker in prostate MRI.

Authors:  Ryan L Brunsing; Natalie M Schenker-Ahmed; Nathan S White; J Kellogg Parsons; Christopher Kane; Joshua Kuperman; Hauke Bartsch; Andrew Karim Kader; Rebecca Rakow-Penner; Tyler M Seibert; Daniel Margolis; Steven S Raman; Carrie R McDonald; Nikdokht Farid; Santosh Kesari; Donna Hansel; Ahmed Shabaik; Anders M Dale; David S Karow
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2016-08-16       Impact factor: 4.813

9.  Template for MR Visualization and Needle Targeting.

Authors:  Rui Li; Sheng Xu; Ivane Bakhutashvili; Ismail B Turkbey; Peter Choyke; Peter Pinto; Bradford Wood; Zion T H Tse
Journal:  Ann Biomed Eng       Date:  2018-11-28       Impact factor: 3.934

10.  Value of targeted prostate biopsy using magnetic resonance-ultrasound fusion in men with prior negative biopsy and elevated prostate-specific antigen.

Authors:  Geoffrey A Sonn; Edward Chang; Shyam Natarajan; Daniel J Margolis; Malu Macairan; Patricia Lieu; Jiaoti Huang; Frederick J Dorey; Robert E Reiter; Leonard S Marks
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2013-03-17       Impact factor: 20.096

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.