Annerleim Walton-Diaz1,2,3, Manuel Madariaga-Venegas4,5, Nicolas Aviles4,6, Juan Carlos Roman4,7,8, Ivan Gallegos4,8, Mauricio Burotto9,10. 1. Urofusión, Santiago, Chile. annerleim@gmail.com. 2. Urology, Instituto Nacional del Cáncer Chile, Santiago, Chile. annerleim@gmail.com. 3. Universidad de Chile, Santiago, Chile. annerleim@gmail.com. 4. Urofusión, Santiago, Chile. 5. Radiology Complejo Hospitalario San José, Santiago, Chile. 6. Urology Hospital San Juan de Dios, Santiago, Chile. 7. Urology, Instituto Nacional del Cáncer Chile, Santiago, Chile. 8. Universidad de Chile, Santiago, Chile. 9. Centro de Estudios Clínicos Bradford Hill, Santiago, Chile. 10. Oncology, Clínica Universidad de los Andes, Santiago, Chile.
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The purpose of this review is to summarize the most current literature regarding the most important aspects to consider when developing a center of excellence for prostate imaging and biopsy. RECENT FINDINGS: Multiparametric MRI (mp-MRI) has changed the way we diagnose and treat prostate cancer. This imaging modality allows for more precise identification of areas suspicious in terms of harboring prostate cancer, enabling performance of targeted mp-MRI-guided biopsies that have been demonstrated to yield superior cancer detection rates. Centers worldwide are increasingly adopting this technology. However, obtaining results comparable with those findings published in the literature can be challenging. The imaging and biopsy process entails the need for a multidisciplinary team including a dedicated radiologist, urologist, and pathologist. Adequate mp-MRI interpretation for accurate lesion identification, acquaintance with the biopsy technique selected, and precise characterization of Gleason Score/Grade Groupings are equal determinants of accurate biopsy results. Furthermore, all specialists are required to attain appropriate learning curves to ensure optimal results. In this review, we characterize crucial aspects to consider when developing a center of excellence for prostate imaging and biopsy as well as insights regarding how to implement them.
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The purpose of this review is to summarize the most current literature regarding the most important aspects to consider when developing a center of excellence for prostate imaging and biopsy. RECENT FINDINGS: Multiparametric MRI (mp-MRI) has changed the way we diagnose and treat prostate cancer. This imaging modality allows for more precise identification of areas suspicious in terms of harboring prostate cancer, enabling performance of targeted mp-MRI-guided biopsies that have been demonstrated to yield superior cancer detection rates. Centers worldwide are increasingly adopting this technology. However, obtaining results comparable with those findings published in the literature can be challenging. The imaging and biopsy process entails the need for a multidisciplinary team including a dedicated radiologist, urologist, and pathologist. Adequate mp-MRI interpretation for accurate lesion identification, acquaintance with the biopsy technique selected, and precise characterization of Gleason Score/Grade Groupings are equal determinants of accurate biopsy results. Furthermore, all specialists are required to attain appropriate learning curves to ensure optimal results. In this review, we characterize crucial aspects to consider when developing a center of excellence for prostate imaging and biopsy as well as insights regarding how to implement them.
Entities:
Keywords:
Biopsy; Fusion; Gleason; ISUP; Multiparametric magnetic resonance image; Prostate
Authors: Matthew D Greer; Anna M Brown; Joanna H Shih; Ronald M Summers; Jamie Marko; Yan Mee Law; Sandeep Sankineni; Arvin K George; Maria J Merino; Peter A Pinto; Peter L Choyke; Baris Turkbey Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2016-07-08 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Lambros Stamatakis; M Minhaj Siddiqui; Jeffrey W Nix; Jennifer Logan; Soroush Rais-Bahrami; Annerleim Walton-Diaz; Anthony N Hoang; Srinivas Vourganti; Hong Truong; Brian Shuch; Howard L Parnes; Baris Turkbey; Peter L Choyke; Bradford J Wood; Richard M Simon; Peter A Pinto Journal: Cancer Date: 2013-07-02 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Andrew B Rosenkrantz; Abimbola Ayoola; David Hoffman; Anunita Khasgiwala; Vinay Prabhu; Paul Smereka; Molly Somberg; Samir S Taneja Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2016-12-27 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Christian Arsov; Nikolaus Becker; Robert Rabenalt; Andreas Hiester; Michael Quentin; Frederic Dietzel; Gerald Antoch; Helmut E Gabbert; Peter Albers; Lars Schimmöller Journal: J Cancer Res Clin Oncol Date: 2015-05-27 Impact factor: 4.553
Authors: Jennifer B Gordetsky; Luciana Schultz; Kristin K Porter; Jeffrey W Nix; John V Thomas; Maria Del Carmen Rodriguez Pena; Soroush Rais-Bahrami Journal: Hum Pathol Date: 2018-03-16 Impact factor: 3.466
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