Literature DB >> 27800057

Comparison of prostate MRI-3D transrectal ultrasound fusion biopsy for first-time and repeat biopsy patients with previous atypical small acinar proliferation.

Derek W Cool1, Cesare Romagnoli1, Jonathan I Izawa2, Joseph Chin2, Lori Gardi3, David Tessier3, Ashley Mercado1, Jonathan Mandel1, Aaron D Ward4, Aaron Fenster3.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: This study evaluates the clinical benefit of magnetic resonance-transrectal ultrasound (MR-TRUS) fusion biopsy over systematic biopsy between first-time and repeat prostate biopsy patients with prior atypical small acinar proliferation (ASAP). MATERIALS: 100 patients were enrolled in a single-centre prospective cohort study: 50 for first biopsy, 50 for repeat biopsy with prior ASAP. Multiparameteric magnetic resonance imaging (MP-MRI) and standard 12-core ultrasound biopsy (Std-Bx) were performed on all patients. Targeted biopsy using MRI-TRUS fusion (Fn-Bx) was performed f suspicious lesions were identified on the pre-biopsy MP-MRI. Classification of clinically significant disease was assessed independently for the Std-Bx vs. Fn-Bx cores to compare the two approaches.
RESULTS: Adenocarcinoma was detected in 49/100 patients (26 first biopsy, 23 ASAP biopsy), with 25 having significant disease (17 first, 8 ASAP). Fn-Bx demonstrated significantly higher per-core cancer detection rates, cancer involvement, and Gleason scores for first-time and ASAP patients. However, Fn-Bx was significantly more likely to detect significant cancer missed on Std-Bx for ASAP patients than first-time biopsy patients. The addition of Fn-Bx to Std-Bx for ASAP patients had a 166.7% relative risk reduction for missing Gleason ≥ 3 + 4 disease (number needed to image with MP-MRI=10 patients) compared to 6.3% for first biopsy (number to image=50 patients). Negative predictive value of MP-MRI for negative biopsy was 79% for first-time and 100% for ASAP patients, with median followup of 32.1 ± 15.5 months.
CONCLUSIONS: MR-TRUS Fn-Bx has a greater clinical impact for repeat biopsy patients with prior ASAP than biopsy-naïve patients by detecting more significant cancers that are missed on Std-Bx.

Entities:  

Year:  2016        PMID: 27800057      PMCID: PMC5085915          DOI: 10.5489/cuaj.3831

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J        ISSN: 1911-6470            Impact factor:   1.862


  31 in total

1.  MRI-guided biopsy of the prostate increases diagnostic performance in men with elevated or increasing PSA levels after previous negative TRUS biopsies.

Authors:  Aristotelis G Anastasiadis; Matthias P Lichy; Udo Nagele; Markus A Kuczyk; Axel S Merseburger; Joerg Hennenlotter; Stefan Corvin; Karl-Dietrich Sievert; Claus D Claussen; Arnulf Stenzl; Heinz-Peter Schlemmer
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2006-03-24       Impact factor: 20.096

2.  A novel stereotactic prostate biopsy system integrating pre-interventional magnetic resonance imaging and live ultrasound fusion.

Authors:  Boris A Hadaschik; Timur H Kuru; Corina Tulea; Philip Rieker; Ionel V Popeneciu; Tobias Simpfendörfer; Johannes Huber; Pawel Zogal; Dogu Teber; Sascha Pahernik; Matthias Roethke; Patrik Zamecnik; Wilfried Roth; Georgios Sakas; Heinz-Peter Schlemmer; Markus Hohenfellner
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2011-10-19       Impact factor: 7.450

3.  Evaluation of intersession 3D-TRUS to 3D-TRUS image registration for repeat prostate biopsies.

Authors:  V V Karnik; A Fenster; J Bax; C Romagnoli; A D Ward
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2011-04       Impact factor: 4.071

4.  Assessment of image registration accuracy in three-dimensional transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy.

Authors:  V V Karnik; A Fenster; J Bax; D W Cool; L Gardi; I Gyacskov; C Romagnoli; A D Ward
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 4.071

5.  Prebiopsy Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Prostate Cancer Diagnosis in Biopsy-naive Men with Suspected Prostate Cancer Based on Elevated Prostate-specific Antigen Values: Results from a Randomized Prospective Blinded Controlled Trial.

Authors:  Panu P Tonttila; Juha Lantto; Eija Pääkkö; Ulla Piippo; Saila Kauppila; Eveliina Lammentausta; Pasi Ohtonen; Markku H Vaarala
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2015-05-29       Impact factor: 20.096

6.  2D-3D rigid registration to compensate for prostate motion during 3D TRUS-guided biopsy.

Authors:  Tharindu De Silva; Aaron Fenster; Derek W Cool; Lori Gardi; Cesare Romagnoli; Jagath Samarabandu; Aaron D Ward
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2013-02       Impact factor: 4.071

7.  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

8.  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

9.  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

10.  First round of targeted biopsies using magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasonography fusion compared with conventional transrectal ultrasonography-guided biopsies for the diagnosis of localised prostate cancer.

Authors:  Pierre Mozer; Morgan Rouprêt; Chloé Le Cossec; Benjamin Granger; Eva Comperat; Arachk de Gorski; Olivier Cussenot; Raphaële Renard-Penna
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2014-07-27       Impact factor: 5.588

View more
  10 in total

1.  Prostate MRI, with or without MRI-targeted biopsy, and systematic biopsy for detecting prostate cancer.

Authors:  Frank-Jan H Drost; Daniël F Osses; Daan Nieboer; Ewout W Steyerberg; Chris H Bangma; Monique J Roobol; Ivo G Schoots
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2019-04-25

Review 2.  3D printing in urology: Is it really promising?

Authors:  Berat Cem Özgür; Ali Ayyıldız
Journal:  Turk J Urol       Date:  2018-01-08

3.  Atypical small acinar proliferation at index prostate biopsy: rethinking the re-biopsy paradigm.

Authors:  Leslie A Ynalvez; Christopher D Kosarek; Preston S Kerr; Ali M Mahmoud; Eduardo J Eyzaguirre; Eduardo Orihuela; Joseph N Sonstein; Stephen B Williams
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2017-10-24       Impact factor: 2.370

Review 4.  Inherited risk assessment and its clinical utility for predicting prostate cancer from diagnostic prostate biopsies.

Authors:  Jianfeng Xu; W Kyle Resurreccion; Zhuqing Shi; Jun Wei; Chi-Hsiung Wang; S Lilly Zheng; Peter J Hulick; Ashley E Ross; Christian P Pavlovich; Brian T Helfand; William B Isaacs
Journal:  Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis       Date:  2022-03-28       Impact factor: 5.455

Review 5.  Diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging targeted biopsy techniques compared to transrectal ultrasound guided biopsy of the prostate: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  E J Bass; A Pantovic; M J Connor; S Loeb; A R Rastinehad; M Winkler; Rhian Gabe; H U Ahmed
Journal:  Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis       Date:  2021-09-21       Impact factor: 5.455

6.  Atypical Small Acinar Proliferation and High Grade Prostatic Intraepithelial Neoplasia: Should We Be Concerned? An Observational Cohort Study with a Minimum Follow-Up of 3 Years.

Authors:  Vinaya Srirangam; Bhavan Prasad Rai; Ahmed Abroaf; Samita Agarwal; Sergey Tadtayev; Charlotte Foley; Tim Lane; Jim Adshead; Nikhil Vasdev
Journal:  Curr Urol       Date:  2017-10-22

7.  3D ultrasound guided navigation system with hybrid image fusion.

Authors:  David Iommi; Alejandra Valladares; Michael Figl; Marko Grahovac; Gabor Fichtinger; Johann Hummel
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-04-23       Impact factor: 4.379

Review 8.  Atypical small acinar proliferation and its significance in pathological reports in modern urological times.

Authors:  Georgios Tsampoukas; Victor Manolas; Dominic Brown; Athanasios Dellis; Konstantinos Deliveliotis; Mohamad Moussa; Athanasios Papatsoris
Journal:  Asian J Urol       Date:  2021-04-30

Review 9.  A critical comparison of techniques for MRI-targeted biopsy of the prostate.

Authors:  Francesco Giganti; Caroline M Moore
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2017-06

10.  Race and prostate imaging: implications for targeted biopsy and image-based prostate cancer interventions.

Authors:  Michael D Gross; Bashir Al Hussein Al Awamlh; Jonathan E Shoag; Elizabeth Mauer; Samprit Banerjee; Daniel J Margolis; Juan M Mosquera; Ann S Hamilton; Maria J Schumura; Jim C Hu
Journal:  BMJ Surg Interv Health Technol       Date:  2019-08-23
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.