Alexandre Magnier1, Cosmina Nedelcu2, Samuel Chelly3, Marie-Christine Rousselet-Chapeau4, Abdel Rahmene Azzouzi3, Souhil Lebdai3. 1. Urology Department, University Hospital of Angers, 4 rue Larrey, 49933, Angers Cedex 9, France. alexandre.magnier@chu-angers.fr. 2. Radiology Department, University Hospital of Angers, Angers, France. 3. Urology Department, University Hospital of Angers, 4 rue Larrey, 49933, Angers Cedex 9, France. 4. Pathology Department, University Hospital of Angers, Angers, France.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The 3D Navigo™ system is a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) fusion device for prostate targeted biopsies (TB). Our aim was to evaluate the clinically significant prostate cancer (CSC) detection rate of TB using the 3D Navigo™ system. METHODS: Patients who underwent TB with the 3D Navigo™ system in our center between June 2014 and May 2018 were prospectively included, excluding those who have previously received treatment for prostate cancer. A 3-Tesla MRI imaging was performed before biopsies; findings were reported according to the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2 (PIRADS). CSC was defined by an ISUP score ≥ 2. RESULTS: 304 patients underwent TB. Median age was 66 years (51-84). Median PSA was 7.75 ng/ml (0.6-70.0). Median prostate volume was 45.0 ml (15.9-221.7). PCa and CSC were found in 70.4% (214/304) and 47.7% (145/304) of the patients, respectively. The proportion of patients diagnosed with CSC among those with PCa was 67.8% (145/214). There was a significant risk of having a CSC in case of PIRADS score ≥ 4 and 5 (OR 5.0, 95% CI [2.7-9.2], P < 0.001; OR 3.2, 95% CI [1.8-5.5], P < 0.001). PIRADS score was an independent risk factor of having a CSC (OR 4.19, 95% CI [2.49-7.05], P < 0.001). There was no significant difference between pathological outcomes of TB and RP in paired analysis (P = 0.892). There was a correlation between TB and RP specimens for PCa detection (r = 0.60, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Detecting CSC with MRI-TRUS fusion targeted biopsies using the 3D Navigo™ system is feasible and safe. We found a positive correlation between TB and RP for ISUP scores.
PURPOSE: The 3D Navigo™ system is a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) fusion device for prostate targeted biopsies (TB). Our aim was to evaluate the clinically significant prostate cancer (CSC) detection rate of TB using the 3D Navigo™ system. METHODS: Patients who underwent TB with the 3D Navigo™ system in our center between June 2014 and May 2018 were prospectively included, excluding those who have previously received treatment for prostate cancer. A 3-Tesla MRI imaging was performed before biopsies; findings were reported according to the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2 (PIRADS). CSC was defined by an ISUP score ≥ 2. RESULTS: 304 patients underwent TB. Median age was 66 years (51-84). Median PSA was 7.75 ng/ml (0.6-70.0). Median prostate volume was 45.0 ml (15.9-221.7). PCa and CSC were found in 70.4% (214/304) and 47.7% (145/304) of the patients, respectively. The proportion of patients diagnosed with CSC among those with PCa was 67.8% (145/214). There was a significant risk of having a CSC in case of PIRADS score ≥ 4 and 5 (OR 5.0, 95% CI [2.7-9.2], P < 0.001; OR 3.2, 95% CI [1.8-5.5], P < 0.001). PIRADS score was an independent risk factor of having a CSC (OR 4.19, 95% CI [2.49-7.05], P < 0.001). There was no significant difference between pathological outcomes of TB and RP in paired analysis (P = 0.892). There was a correlation between TB and RP specimens for PCa detection (r = 0.60, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Detecting CSC with MRI-TRUS fusion targeted biopsies using the 3D Navigo™ system is feasible and safe. We found a positive correlation between TB and RP for ISUP scores.
Authors: Christophe K Mannaerts; Maudy Gayet; Jan F Verbeek; Marc R W Engelbrecht; C Dilara Savci-Heijink; Gerrit J Jager; Maaike P M Gielens; Hans van der Linden; Harrie P Beerlage; Theo M de Reijke; Hessel Wijkstra; Monique J Roobol Journal: Eur Urol Oncol Date: 2018-05-15
Authors: Marloes van der Leest; Erik Cornel; Bas Israël; Rianne Hendriks; Anwar R Padhani; Martijn Hoogenboom; Patrik Zamecnik; Dirk Bakker; Anglita Yanti Setiasti; Jeroen Veltman; Huib van den Hout; Hans van der Lelij; Inge van Oort; Sjoerd Klaver; Frans Debruyne; Michiel Sedelaar; Gerjon Hannink; Maroeska Rovers; Christina Hulsbergen-van de Kaa; Jelle O Barentsz Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2018-11-23 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Maudy Gayet; Anouk van der Aa; Peter Schmitz; Harrie P Beerlage; Bart Ph Schrier; Peter F A Mulders; Massimo Mischi; Hessel Wijkstra Journal: World J Urol Date: 2016-02-04 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Anouk Anna Maria Arnoldus van der Aa; Christophe Koenraad Mannaerts; Maudy C W Gayet; Johannes Cornelis van der Linden; Barthold Philip Schrier; J P Michiel Sedelaar; Massimo Mischi; Harrie P Beerlage; Hessel Wijkstra Journal: BMC Urol Date: 2019-04-16 Impact factor: 2.264
Authors: Veeru Kasivisvanathan; Antti S Rannikko; Marcelo Borghi; Valeria Panebianco; Lance A Mynderse; Markku H Vaarala; Alberto Briganti; Lars Budäus; Giles Hellawell; Richard G Hindley; Monique J Roobol; Scott Eggener; Maneesh Ghei; Arnauld Villers; Franck Bladou; Geert M Villeirs; Jaspal Virdi; Silvan Boxler; Grégoire Robert; Paras B Singh; Wulphert Venderink; Boris A Hadaschik; Alain Ruffion; Jim C Hu; Daniel Margolis; Sébastien Crouzet; Laurence Klotz; Samir S Taneja; Peter Pinto; Inderbir Gill; Clare Allen; Francesco Giganti; Alex Freeman; Stephen Morris; Shonit Punwani; Norman R Williams; Chris Brew-Graves; Jonathan Deeks; Yemisi Takwoingi; Mark Emberton; Caroline M Moore Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2018-03-18 Impact factor: 176.079