Vidhush K Yarlagadda1, Win Shun Lai1, Jennifer B Gordetsky2, Kristin K Porter3, Jeffrey W Nix1, John V Thomas3, Soroush Rais-Bahrami4. 1. Department of Urology, University of Alabama at Birmingham School of Medicine, Birmingham, AL, USA. 2. Department of Urology, University of Alabama at Birmingham School of Medicine, Birmingham, AL, USA; Department of Pathology, University of Alabama at Birmingham School of Medicine, Birmingham, AL, USA. 3. Department of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham School of Medicine, Birmingham, AL, USA. 4. Department of Urology, University of Alabama at Birmingham School of Medicine, Birmingham, AL, USA; Department of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham School of Medicine, Birmingham, AL, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: We aimed to investigate the efficiency and cancer detection of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) / ultrasonography (US) fusion-guided prostate biopsy in a cohort of biopsy-naive men compared with standard-of-care systematic extended sextant transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS)-guided biopsy. METHODS: From 2014 to 2016, 72 biopsy-naive men referred for initial prostate cancer evaluation who underwent MRI of the prostate were prospectively evaluated. Retrospective review was performed on 69 patients with lesions suspicious for malignancy who underwent MRI/US fusion-guided biopsy in addition to systematic extended sextant biopsy. Biometric, imaging, and pathology data from both the MRI-targeted biopsies and systematic biopsies were analyzed and compared. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in overall prostate cancer detection when comparing MRI-targeted biopsies to standard systematic biopsies (P = 0.39). Furthermore, there were no significant differences in the distribution of severity of cancers based on grade groups in cases with cancer detection (P = 0.68). However, significantly fewer needle cores were taken during the MRI/US fusion-guided biopsy compared with systematic biopsy (63% less cores sampled, P < 0.001) CONCLUSION: In biopsy-naive men, MRI/US fusion-guided prostate biopsy offers equal prostate cancer detection compared with systematic TRUS-guided biopsy with significantly fewer tissue cores using the targeted technique. This approach can potentially reduce morbidity in the future if used instead of systematic biopsy without sacrificing the ability to detect prostate cancer, particularly in cases with higher grade disease.
PURPOSE: We aimed to investigate the efficiency and cancer detection of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) / ultrasonography (US) fusion-guided prostate biopsy in a cohort of biopsy-naive men compared with standard-of-care systematic extended sextant transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS)-guided biopsy. METHODS: From 2014 to 2016, 72 biopsy-naive men referred for initial prostate cancer evaluation who underwent MRI of the prostate were prospectively evaluated. Retrospective review was performed on 69 patients with lesions suspicious for malignancy who underwent MRI/US fusion-guided biopsy in addition to systematic extended sextant biopsy. Biometric, imaging, and pathology data from both the MRI-targeted biopsies and systematic biopsies were analyzed and compared. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in overall prostate cancer detection when comparing MRI-targeted biopsies to standard systematic biopsies (P = 0.39). Furthermore, there were no significant differences in the distribution of severity of cancers based on grade groups in cases with cancer detection (P = 0.68). However, significantly fewer needle cores were taken during the MRI/US fusion-guided biopsy compared with systematic biopsy (63% less cores sampled, P < 0.001) CONCLUSION: In biopsy-naive men, MRI/US fusion-guided prostate biopsy offers equal prostate cancer detection compared with systematic TRUS-guided biopsy with significantly fewer tissue cores using the targeted technique. This approach can potentially reduce morbidity in the future if used instead of systematic biopsy without sacrificing the ability to detect prostate cancer, particularly in cases with higher grade disease.
Authors: Michael A Liss; Behfar Ehdaie; Stacy Loeb; Maxwell V Meng; Jay D Raman; Vanessa Spears; Sean P Stroup Journal: J Urol Date: 2017-03-29 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Daniel J Lee; Katherine Mallin; Amy J Graves; Sam S Chang; David F Penson; Matthew J Resnick; Daniel A Barocas Journal: J Urol Date: 2017-05-25 Impact factor: 7.450
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
Authors: John K Weaver; Eric H Kim; Joel M Vetter; Kathryn J Fowler; Cary L Siegel; Gerald L Andriole Journal: Urology Date: 2015-11-03 Impact factor: 2.649
Authors: Michele Fascelli; Soroush Rais-Bahrami; Sandeep Sankineni; Anna M Brown; Arvin K George; Richard Ho; Thomas Frye; Amichai Kilchevsky; Raju Chelluri; Steven Abboud; M Minhaj Siddiqui; Maria J Merino; Bradford J Wood; Peter L Choyke; Peter A Pinto; Baris Turkbey Journal: Urology Date: 2015-12-08 Impact factor: 2.633
Authors: Annerleim Walton-Diaz; Manuel Madariaga-Venegas; Nicolas Aviles; Juan Carlos Roman; Ivan Gallegos; Mauricio Burotto Journal: Curr Urol Rep Date: 2019-09-02 Impact factor: 3.092
Authors: Erin Baumgartner; Maria Del Carmen Rodriguez Pena; Marie-Lisa Eich; Kristin K Porter; Jeffrey W Nix; Soroush Rais-Bahrami; Jennifer Gordetsky Journal: Hum Pathol Date: 2019-05-07 Impact factor: 3.466
Authors: Rachael L Sherrer; Zachary A Glaser; Jennifer B Gordetsky; Jeffrey W Nix; Kristin K Porter; Soroush Rais-Bahrami Journal: Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis Date: 2018-11-09 Impact factor: 5.554
Authors: Zachary A Glaser; Jennifer B Gordetsky; Sejong Bae; Jeffrey W Nix; Kristin K Porter; Soroush Rais-Bahrami Journal: Urol Oncol Date: 2019-09-05 Impact factor: 3.498
Authors: Joseph M Norris; Benjamin S Simpson; Marina A Parry; Clare Allen; Rhys Ball; Alex Freeman; Daniel Kelly; Hyung L Kim; Alex Kirkham; Sungyong You; Veeru Kasivisvanathan; Hayley C Whitaker; Mark Emberton Journal: Eur Urol Open Sci Date: 2020-07
Authors: Brittani L Bungart; Lu Lan; Pu Wang; Rui Li; Michael O Koch; Liang Cheng; Timothy A Masterson; Murat Dundar; Ji-Xin Cheng Journal: Photoacoustics Date: 2018-08-03