Literature DB >> 27337710

Development and Phantom Validation of a 3-D-Ultrasound-Guided System for Targeting MRI-Visible Lesions During Transrectal Prostate Biopsy.

Yipeng Hu, Veeru Kasivisvanathan, Lucy A M Simmons, Matthew J Clarkson, Stephen A Thompson, Taimur T Shah, Hashim U Ahmed, Shonit Punwani, David J Hawkes, Mark Emberton, Caroline M Moore, Dean C Barratt.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Three- and four-dimensional transrectal ultrasound transducers are now available from most major ultrasound equipment manufacturers, but currently are incorporated into only one commercial prostate biopsy guidance system. Such transducers offer the benefits of rapid volumetric imaging, but can cause substantial measurement distortion in electromagnetic tracking sensors, which are commonly used to enable 3-D navigation. In this paper, we describe the design, development, and validation of a 3-D-ultrasound-guided transrectal prostate biopsy system that employs high-accuracy optical tracking to localize the ultrasound probe and prostate targets in 3-D physical space.
METHODS: The accuracy of the system was validated by evaluating the targeted needle placement error after inserting a biopsy needle to sample planned targets in a phantom using standard 2-D ultrasound guidance versus real-time 3-D guidance provided by the new system.
RESULTS: The overall mean needle-segment-to-target distance error was 3.6 ± 4.0 mm and mean needle-to-target distance was 3.2 ± 2.4 mm.
CONCLUSION: A significant increase in needle placement accuracy was observed when using the 3-D guidance system compared with visual targeting of invisible (virtual) lesions using a standard B-mode ultrasound-guided biopsy technique.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27337710      PMCID: PMC5053368          DOI: 10.1109/TBME.2016.2582734

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  IEEE Trans Biomed Eng        ISSN: 0018-9294            Impact factor:   4.538


  42 in total

1.  Comparative tracking error analysis of five different optical tracking systems.

Authors:  R Khadem; C C Yeh; M Sadeghi-Tehrani; M R Bax; J A Johnson; J N Welch; E P Wilkinson; R Shahidi
Journal:  Comput Aided Surg       Date:  2000

Review 2.  Three-dimensional ultrasound imaging.

Authors:  A Fenster; D B Downey; H N Cardinal
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2001-05       Impact factor: 3.609

3.  3-Dimensional elastic registration system of prostate biopsy location by real-time 3-dimensional transrectal ultrasound guidance with magnetic resonance/transrectal ultrasound image fusion.

Authors:  Osamu Ukimura; Mihir M Desai; Suzanne Palmer; Samuel Valencerina; Mitchell Gross; Andre L Abreu; Monish Aron; Inderbir S Gill
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2012-01-21       Impact factor: 7.450

4.  Robotic transperineal prostate biopsy: pilot clinical study.

Authors:  H Ho; J S P Yuen; P Mohan; E W Lim; C W S Cheng
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2011-09-21       Impact factor: 2.649

5.  [Real-time three-dimensional (4D) ultrasound-guided prostatic biopsies on a phantom. Comparative study versus 2D guidance].

Authors:  Jean-Alexandre Long; Vincent Daanen; Alexandre Moreau-Gaudry; Jocelyne Troccaz; Jean-Jacques Rambeaud; Jean-Luc Descotes
Journal:  Prog Urol       Date:  2007-11       Impact factor: 0.915

6.  Comparison of MR/ultrasound fusion-guided biopsy with ultrasound-guided biopsy for the diagnosis of prostate cancer.

Authors:  M Minhaj Siddiqui; Soroush Rais-Bahrami; Baris Turkbey; Arvin K George; Jason Rothwax; Nabeel Shakir; Chinonyerem Okoro; Dima Raskolnikov; Howard L Parnes; W Marston Linehan; Maria J Merino; Richard M Simon; Peter L Choyke; Bradford J Wood; Peter A Pinto
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2015-01-27       Impact factor: 56.272

7.  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

8.  A realistic deformable prostate phantom for multimodal imaging and needle-insertion procedures.

Authors:  Nikolai Hungr; Jean-Alexandre Long; Vincent Beix; Jocelyne Troccaz
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2012-04       Impact factor: 4.071

Review 9.  Current status of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and ultrasonography fusion software platforms for guidance of prostate biopsies.

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

Review 10.  MRI-ultrasound fusion for guidance of targeted prostate biopsy.

Authors:  Leonard Marks; Shelena Young; Shyam Natarajan
Journal:  Curr Opin Urol       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 2.309

View more
  2 in total

1.  Initial phantom studies for an office-based low-field MR system for prostate biopsy.

Authors:  Selin Chiragzada; Eva Hellman; Duncan Michael; Ram Narayanan; Aleksandar Nacev; Dinesh Kumar
Journal:  Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg       Date:  2021-04-23       Impact factor: 2.924

2.  The ReIMAGINE prostate cancer risk study protocol: A prospective cohort study in men with a suspicion of prostate cancer who are referred onto an MRI-based diagnostic pathway with donation of tissue, blood and urine for biomarker analyses.

Authors:  Teresa Marsden; Neil McCartan; Louise Brown; Manuel Rodriguez-Justo; Tom Syer; Giorgio Brembilla; Mieke Van Hemelrijck; Ton Coolen; Gerhardt Attard; Shonit Punwani; Caroline M Moore; Hashim U Ahmed; Mark Emberton
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-02-24       Impact factor: 3.240

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.