Literature DB >> 23579051

Prostate cancer diagnosis: multiparametric MR-targeted biopsy with cognitive and transrectal US-MR fusion guidance versus systematic biopsy--prospective multicenter study.

Philippe Puech1, Olivier Rouvière, Raphaele Renard-Penna, Arnauld Villers, Patrick Devos, Marc Colombel, Marc-Olivier Bitker, Xavier Leroy, Florence Mège-Lechevallier, Eva Comperat, Adil Ouzzane, Laurent Lemaitre.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To compare biopsy performance of two approaches for multiparametric magnetic resonance (MR)-targeted biopsy (TB) with that of extended systematic biopsy (SB) in prostate cancer (PCa) detection.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This institutional review board-approved multicenter prospective study (May 2009 to January 2011) included 95 patients with informed consent who were suspected of having PCa, with a suspicious abnormality (target) at prebiopsy MR. Patients underwent 12-core SB and four-core TB with transrectal ultrasonographic (US) guidance, with two cores aimed visually (cognitive TB [TB-COG]) and two cores aimed using transrectal US-MR fusion software (fusion-guided TB [TB-FUS]). SB and TB positivity for cancer and sampling quality (mean longest core cancer length, Gleason score) were compared. Clinically significant PCa was any 3 mm or greater core cancer length or any greater than 3 Gleason pattern for SB or any cancer length for TB. Statistical analysis included t test, paired χ(2) test, and κ statistic. Primary end point (core cancer length) was calculated (paired t test).
RESULTS: Among 95 patients (median age, 65 years; mean prostate-specific antigen level, 10.05 ng/mL [10.05 μg/L]), positivity rate for PCa was 59% (n = 56) for SB and 69% (n = 66) for TB (P = .033); rate for clinically significant PCa was 52% (n = 49) for SB and 67% (n = 64) for TB (P = .0011). Cancer was diagnosed through TB in 16 patients (17%) with negative SB results. Mean longest core cancer lengths were 4.6 mm for SB and 7.3 mm for TB (P < .0001). In 12 of 51 (24%) MR imaging targets with positive SB and TB results, TB led to Gleason score upgrading. In 79 MR imaging targets, positivity for cancer was 47% (n = 37) with TB-COG and 53% (n = 42) with TB-FUS (P = .16). Neither technique was superior for Gleason score assessment.
CONCLUSION: Prebiopsy MR imaging combined with transrectal US-guided TB increases biopsy performance in detecting PCa, especially clinically significant PCa. No significant difference was observed between TB-FUS and TB-COG for TB guidance.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23579051     DOI: 10.1148/radiol.13121501

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiology        ISSN: 0033-8419            Impact factor:   11.105


  114 in total

1.  Open Source Platform for Transperineal In-Bore MRI-Guided Targeted Prostate Biopsy.

Authors:  Christian Herz; Kyle MacNeil; Peter A Behringer; Junichi Tokuda; Alireza Mehrtash; Parvin Mousavi; Ron Kikinis; Fiona M Fennessy; Clare M Tempany; Kemal Tuncali; Andriy Fedorov
Journal:  IEEE Trans Biomed Eng       Date:  2019-05-23       Impact factor: 4.538

2.  Computer-aided diagnosis of prostate cancer with MRI.

Authors:  Baowei Fei
Journal:  Curr Opin Biomed Eng       Date:  2017-09

3.  Prostate cancer: MRI/US-guided biopsy--a viable alternative to TRUS-guidance.

Authors:  Wendy J M van de Ven; Jelle O Barentsz
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2013-08-13       Impact factor: 14.432

4.  Does the Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) version 2 improve accuracy in reporting anterior lesions on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI)?

Authors:  Richard Hoffmann; Callum Logan; Michael O'Callaghan; Kirsten Gormly; Ken Chan; Darren Foreman
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2017-11-29       Impact factor: 2.370

5.  Apparent diffusion coefficient value is a strong predictor of unsuspected aggressiveness of prostate cancer before radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Raphaele Renard Penna; Geraldine Cancel-Tassin; Eva Comperat; Pierre Mozer; Priscilla Léon; Justine Varinot; Morgan Roupret; Marc-Olivier Bitker; Olivier Lucidarme; Olivier Cussenot
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2016-02-22       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 6.  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 7.  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

8.  Impact of the type of ultrasound probe on prostate cancer detection rate and characterization in patients undergoing MRI-targeted prostate biopsies using cognitive fusion.

Authors:  Guillaume Ploussard; Samuel Aronson; Vincent Pelsser; Mark Levental; Maurice Anidjar; Franck Bladou
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2013-10-16       Impact factor: 4.226

9.  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

10.  The role of MRI-targeted and confirmatory biopsies for cancer upstaging at selection in patients considered for active surveillance for clinically low-risk prostate cancer.

Authors:  François Marliere; Philippe Puech; Ahmed Benkirane; Arnauld Villers; Laurent Lemaitre; Xavier Leroy; Nacim Betrouni; Adil Ouzzane
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2014-05-12       Impact factor: 4.226

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.