Literature DB >> 33033806

In-Bore MRI-guided Prostate Biopsies in Patients with Prior Positive Transrectal US-guided Biopsy Results: Pathologic Outcomes and Predictors of Missed Cancers.

Kareem K Elfatairy1, Christopher P Filson1, Martin G Sanda1, Adeboye O Osunkoya1, Sherif G Nour1.   

Abstract

Purpose: To evaluate the role of confirmatory in-bore MRI-guided biopsy in patients with low- or intermediate-risk disease diagnosed at prior transrectal US-guided biopsy and to evaluate the rate and predictors for missed cancers. Materials and
Methods: A retrospective evaluation of 50 consecutive men who had previously undergone transrectal US-guided biopsy with positive results and who underwent subsequent in-bore MRI-guided biopsy at our university hospital (average time interval, 11 months) between 2012 and 2016 was performed. Ten men were excluded because of a history of treatment after transrectal US-guided biopsy. A total of 40 men (mean age, 63 years; range, 47-84 years) were included in this study. Multiparametric 3-T MRI (T2-weighted, diffusion-weighted, and dynamic contrast material-enhanced) and transrectal in-bore MRI-guided biopsy were performed. Cancer detection, disease-grade changes, and cancers missed at in-bore MRI-guided biopsy were evaluated. Descriptive statistics were used to report different rates. The Fisher exact test was used for categoric variables. The Mann-Whitney U test and independent Student t test were used for nonparametric and parametric data, respectively. The McNemar test was used for paired data.
Results: The overall cancer detection rate when using in-bore MRI-guided biopsy was 65% (26 of 40). In-bore MRI-guided biopsy detected 14 previously undiscovered cancerous lesions (clinically significant cancers [CSCs], 57.1% [eight of 14]). An overall disease upgrade by in-bore MRI-guided biopsy occurred in 40% (16 of 40) of cases (61.5% [16 of 26] of cases with positive results from in-bore MRI-guided biopsy). One case was downgraded from a Gleason score (GS) of 3 + 4 = 7 to a GS of 3 + 3 = 6. Out of 71 sextant biopsies with positive results detected by transrectal US-guided biopsy (from all 40 patients), 80% (57 of 71) were visible on MR images (in-bore MRI-guided biopsy results were positive in 52.6% [30 of 57]), and 20% (14 of 71) had no image correlates on MR images. In-bore MRI-guided biopsy upgraded 60% (18 of 30) and downgraded 3.3% (one of 30) of detected lesions. The false-negative rate was 35% (14.2% [two of 14] of patients had CSCs; GS ≥ 7), was higher in prostate volumes of greater than 40 mL, and was lower in the anterior gland location (P = .04 and .01, respectively).
Conclusion: Performing confirmatory in-bore MRI-guided biopsy following positive transrectal US-guided biopsy resulted in a high disease-upgrade incidence with subsequently improved disease-risk stratification, particularly when considering patients for active surveillance or focal therapy. Supplemental material is available for this article. © RSNA, 2020See also the commentary by Weiss and Solomon in this issue. 2020 by the Radiological Society of North America, Inc.

Entities:  

Year:  2020        PMID: 33033806      PMCID: PMC7523503          DOI: 10.1148/rycan.2020190078

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiol Imaging Cancer        ISSN: 2638-616X


  37 in total

1.  MRI-guided prostate biopsy detects clinically significant cancer: analysis of a cohort of 100 patients after previous negative TRUS biopsy.

Authors:  M Roethke; A G Anastasiadis; M Lichy; M Werner; P Wagner; S Kruck; Claus D Claussen; A Stenzl; H P Schlemmer; D Schilling
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2011-04-22       Impact factor: 4.226

2.  Pathological upgrading and up staging with immediate repeat biopsy in patients eligible for active surveillance.

Authors:  Ryan K Berglund; Timothy A Masterson; Kinjal C Vora; Scott E Eggener; James A Eastham; Bertrand D Guillonneau
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2008-09-17       Impact factor: 7.450

3.  Prospective assessment of prostate cancer aggressiveness using 3-T diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging-guided biopsies versus a systematic 10-core transrectal ultrasound prostate biopsy cohort.

Authors:  Thomas Hambrock; Caroline Hoeks; Christina Hulsbergen-van de Kaa; Tom Scheenen; Jurgen Fütterer; Stefan Bouwense; Inge van Oort; Fritz Schröder; Henkjan Huisman; Jelle Barentsz
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2011-08-27       Impact factor: 20.096

4.  Magnetic resonance imaging guided prostate biopsy in men with repeat negative biopsies and increased prostate specific antigen.

Authors:  Thomas Hambrock; Diederik M Somford; Caroline Hoeks; Stefan A W Bouwense; Henkjan Huisman; Derya Yakar; Inge M van Oort; J Alfred Witjes; Jurgen J Fütterer; Jelle O Barentsz
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2009-12-14       Impact factor: 7.450

5.  Increasing the number of biopsies increases the concordance of Gleason scores of needle biopsies and prostatectomy specimens.

Authors:  Rauf Taner Divrik; Aşkin Eroglu; Ali Sahin; Ferruh Zorlu; Haluk Ozen
Journal:  Urol Oncol       Date:  2007 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 3.498

6.  Nomogram use for the prediction of indolent prostate cancer: impact on screen-detected populations.

Authors:  Stijn Roemeling; Monique J Roobol; Michael W Kattan; Theo H van der Kwast; Ewout W Steyerberg; Fritz H Schröder
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2007-11-15       Impact factor: 6.860

7.  Targeted prostate biopsy in select men for active surveillance: do the Epstein criteria still apply?

Authors:  Jim C Hu; Edward Chang; Shyam Natarajan; Daniel J Margolis; Malu Macairan; Patricia Lieu; Jiaoti Huang; Geoffrey Sonn; Frederick J Dorey; Leonard S Marks
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2014-02-08       Impact factor: 7.450

8.  Active Surveillance for the Management of Localized Prostate Cancer (Cancer Care Ontario Guideline): American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline Endorsement.

Authors:  Ronald C Chen; R Bryan Rumble; D Andrew Loblaw; Antonio Finelli; Behfar Ehdaie; Matthew R Cooperberg; Scott C Morgan; Scott Tyldesley; John J Haluschak; Winston Tan; Stewart Justman; Suneil Jain
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2016-02-16       Impact factor: 44.544

9.  In-bore magnetic resonance-guided transrectal biopsy for the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer.

Authors:  Ely R Felker; Stephanie A Lee-Felker; John Feller; Daniel J Margolis; David S Lu; Robert Princenthal; Stuart May; Martin Cohen; Jiaoti Huang; Jeffrey Yoshida; Bernadette Greenwood; Hyun J Kim; Steven S Raman
Journal:  Abdom Radiol (NY)       Date:  2016-05

10.  In-bore setup and software for 3T MRI-guided transperineal prostate biopsy.

Authors:  Junichi Tokuda; Kemal Tuncali; Iulian Iordachita; Sang-Eun Song; Andriy Fedorov; Sota Oguro; Andras Lasso; Fiona M Fennessy; Clare M Tempany; Nobuhiko Hata
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2012-09-05       Impact factor: 3.609

View more
  2 in total

1.  Confirmatory MRI-guided Biopsy Following Positive Transrectal US-guided Biopsy Results in Improved Risk Stratification and Treatment Planning for Newly Diagnosed Prostate Cancer.

Authors:  Clifford R Weiss; Alex J Solomon
Journal:  Radiol Imaging Cancer       Date:  2020-09-25

2.  Artifact reduction of coaxial needles in magnetic resonance imaging-guided abdominal interventions at 1.5 T: a phantom study.

Authors:  Vanessa Franziska Schmidt; Federica Arnone; Olaf Dietrich; Max Seidensticker; Marco Armbruster; Jens Ricke; Philipp Maximilian Kazmierczak
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-11-25       Impact factor: 4.379

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.