Literature DB >> 25018073

A Workflow to Improve the Alignment of Prostate Imaging with Whole-mount Histopathology.

Hidekazu Yamamoto, Dror Nir, Lona Vyas, Richard T Chang, Rick Popert, Declan Cahill, Ben Challacombe, Prokar Dasgupta, Ashish Chandra.   

Abstract

RATIONALE AND
OBJECTIVES: Evaluation of prostate imaging tests against whole-mount histology specimens requires accurate alignment between radiologic and histologic data sets. Misalignment results in false-positive and -negative zones as assessed by imaging. We describe a workflow for three-dimensional alignment of prostate imaging data against whole-mount prostatectomy reference specimens and assess its performance against a standard workflow.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ethical approval was granted. Patients underwent motorized transrectal ultrasound (Prostate Histoscanning) to generate a three-dimensional image of the prostate before radical prostatectomy. The test workflow incorporated steps for axial alignment between imaging and histology, size adjustments following formalin fixation, and use of custom-made parallel cutters and digital caliper instruments. The control workflow comprised freehand cutting and assumed homogeneous block thicknesses at the same relative angles between pathology and imaging sections.
RESULTS: Thirty radical prostatectomy specimens were histologically and radiologically processed, either by an alignment-optimized workflow (n = 20) or a control workflow (n = 10). The optimized workflow generated tissue blocks of heterogeneous thicknesses but with no significant drifting in the cutting plane. The control workflow resulted in significantly nonparallel blocks, accurately matching only one out of four histology blocks to their respective imaging data. The image-to-histology alignment accuracy was 20% greater in the optimized workflow (P < .0001), with higher sensitivity (85% vs. 69%) and specificity (94% vs. 73%) for margin prediction in a 5 × 5-mm grid analysis.
CONCLUSIONS: A significantly better alignment was observed in the optimized workflow. Evaluation of prostate imaging biomarkers using whole-mount histology references should include a test-to-reference spatial alignment workflow.
Copyright © 2014 AUR. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Prostate cancer; histoscanning; image alignment; image registration; whole-mount histopathology

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25018073     DOI: 10.1016/j.acra.2014.04.015

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acad Radiol        ISSN: 1076-6332            Impact factor:   3.173


  4 in total

1.  Magnetic Resonance Imaging Underestimation of Prostate Cancer Geometry: Use of Patient Specific Molds to Correlate Images with Whole Mount Pathology.

Authors:  Alan Priester; Shyam Natarajan; Pooria Khoshnoodi; Daniel J Margolis; Steven S Raman; Robert E Reiter; Jiaoti Huang; Warren Grundfest; Leonard S Marks
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2016-07-30       Impact factor: 7.450

2.  Mri-based cancer lesion analysis with 3d printed patient specific prostate cutting guides.

Authors:  David R Rutkowski; Shane A Wells; Brian Johnson; Wei Huang; David F Jarrard; Joshua M Lang; Steve Cho; Alejandro Roldán-Alzate
Journal:  Am J Clin Exp Urol       Date:  2019-08-15

3.  Registration Accuracy of Patient-Specific, Three-Dimensional-Printed Prostate Molds for Correlating Pathology With Magnetic Resonance Imaging.

Authors:  Alan Priester; Holden Wu; Pooria Khoshnoodi; Douglas Schneider; Zhaohuan Zhang; Nazanin H Asvadi; Anthony Sisk; Steven Raman; Robert Reiter; Warren Grundfest; Leonard S Marks; Shyam Natarajan
Journal:  IEEE Trans Biomed Eng       Date:  2018-04-19       Impact factor: 4.538

Review 4.  Accurate validation of ultrasound imaging of prostate cancer: a review of challenges in registration of imaging and histopathology.

Authors:  Rogier R Wildeboer; Ruud J G van Sloun; Arnoud W Postema; Christophe K Mannaerts; Maudy Gayet; Harrie P Beerlage; Hessel Wijkstra; Massimo Mischi
Journal:  J Ultrasound       Date:  2018-07-30
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.