Detection of significant prostate cancer using target saturation in transperineal magnetic resonance imaging/transrectal ultrasonography–fusion biopsy: A prospective, randomized comparison to conventional target biopsy

2021 ◽  
Vol 79 ◽  
pp. S1272
Author(s):  
Y. Saner ◽  
M. Wiesenfarth ◽  
S. Tschirdewahn ◽  
L. Püllen ◽  
D. Bonekamp ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Magnetic Resonance Imaging ◽  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Magnetic Resonance ◽  
Transrectal Ultrasonography ◽  
Resonance Imaging ◽  
Fusion Biopsy ◽  
Target Biopsy

Naive patients with suspicious prostate cancer and positive multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mp-MRI): is it time for fusion target biopsy alone?

2021 ◽  
pp. 205141582110237
Author(s):  
Enrico Checcucci ◽  
Sabrina De Cillis ◽  
Daniele Amparore ◽  
Diletta Garrou ◽  
Roberta Aimar ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Magnetic Resonance Imaging ◽  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Magnetic Resonance ◽  
Detection Rate ◽  
Resonance Imaging ◽  
Fusion Biopsy ◽  
Grade Group ◽  
Final Pathology ◽  
Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging ◽  
Clinically Significant

Objectives: To determine if standard biopsy still has a role in the detection of prostate cancer or clinically significant prostate cancer in biopsy-naive patients with positive multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging. Materials and methods: We extracted, from our prospective maintained fusion biopsy database, patients from March 2014 to December 2018. The detection rate of prostate cancer and clinically significant prostate cancer and complication rate were analysed in a cohort of patients who underwent fusion biopsy alone (group A) or fusion biopsy plus standard biopsy (group B). The International Society of Urological Pathology grade group determined on prostate biopsy with the grade group determined on final pathology among patients who underwent radical prostatectomy were compared. Results: Prostate cancer was found in 249/389 (64.01%) and 215/337 (63.8%) patients in groups A and B, respectively ( P=0.98), while the clinically significant prostate cancer detection rate was 57.8% and 55.1% ( P=0.52). No significant differences in complications were found. No differences in the upgrading rate between biopsy and final pathology finding after radical prostatectomy were recorded. Conclusions: In biopsy-naive patients, with suspected prostate cancer and positive multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging the addition of standard biopsy to fusion biopsy did not increase significantly the detection rate of prostate cancer or clinically significant prostate cancer. Moreover, the rate of upgrading of the cancer grade group between biopsy and final pathology was not affected by the addition of standard biopsy. Level of evidence: Not applicable for this multicentre audit.

scholarly journals MRI-TRUS fusion biopsy in diagnostics of prostate cancer

2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 86-93
Author(s):  
R.A. Romanov ◽  
◽  
A.V. Koryakin ◽  
A.V. Sivkov ◽  
B.Ya. Alekseev ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Magnetic Resonance Imaging ◽  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Magnetic Resonance ◽  
Prostate Biopsy ◽  
Targeted Biopsy ◽  
Resonance Imaging ◽  
Fusion Biopsy ◽  
Advantages And Disadvantages ◽  
Magnetic Resonance Imaging Mri ◽  
Targeted Biopsies

Introduction. Significant improvement in the quality of visualization of the prostate using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), as well as the development of technologies for virtual combination of MRI and ultrasound images opens new horizons in the diagnosis of prostate cancer. The introduction of the PI-RADS system has allowed the standardization of MRI findings, and the development of fusion biopsy systems seeks to make diagnostics more accurate and less operator-dependent. Materials and methods. In this literature review, we evaluate the effectiveness of various biopsy approaches and discuss the prospects for targeted biopsies. The search for publications was carried out in the databases PubMed, e-library, Web of Scince et al. For citation, 55 literature sources were selected that met the search criteria for the keywords, «prostate cancer», «biopsy», «MRI», «TRUS», «fusion». Results. Diagnosis of prostate cancer using MRI. Modern technologies for radiological diagnosis of prostate cancer using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are based on the standardized PI-RADS protocol, using different modes (T2, diffusion-weighted images and contrast enhancement), which provides the best visualization of tumor-suspicious nodes in the prostate gland, allowing determination of lesion localization and size for subsequent targeted biopsy. Options for performing a prostate biopsy to diagnose prostate cancer. A description of the methods and effectiveness of transrectal and transperineal biopsy under ultrasound guidance is carried out - due to the fact that ultrasound diagnostics of prostate cancer has a rather low sensitivity due to small differences in the ultrasound structure of normal and tumor tissue of the prostate, an extended template biopsy technique was proposed, which involves puncture of the prostate through a special lattice. It also describes the technology of fusion biopsy and also provides literature data comparing the diagnostic accuracy of standard TRUS and fusion prostate biopsy, as well as the importance of transrectal / transperineal access. Questions for further study. Given the desire to reduce the number of biopsies while maintaining or even increasing the accuracy of diagnosing prostate cancer, data from studies investigating the feasibility of combining polyfocal (non-targeted) and targeted (targeted) biopsies are presented. Conclusion. The existing methods of non-targeted biopsy (polyfocal, saturation, template) and targeted (fusion biopsy) have their advantages and disadvantages, which currently do not allow making certain recommendations for their use, but a significant number of authors prefer MRI-as sisted, fusion -biopsy.

scholarly journals Usefulness of Prostate-Specific Antigen Density as an Indicator for Recommending Prebiopsy Magnetic Resonance Imaging to Prevent Missed Prostate Cancer Diagnoses

2021 ◽  
Vol 19 (3) ◽  
pp. 155-163
Author(s):  
Jin Hyung Jeon ◽  
Kyo Chul Koo ◽  
Byung Ha Chung ◽  
Kwang Suk Lee
Keyword(s):  
Magnetic Resonance Imaging ◽  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Magnetic Resonance ◽  
Prostate Specific Antigen ◽  
Specific Antigen ◽  
Resonance Imaging ◽  
Detection Rates ◽  
Psa Density ◽  
Systematic Biopsy ◽  
Target Biopsy

Purpose: To identify the indication for recommending prebiopsy magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to prevent prostate cancer missed diagnoses in cases without prebiopsy MRI.Materials and Methods: Between January 2017 and September 2020, 585 patients suspected with prostate cancer underwent prostate biopsy after MRI. For patients with visible lesions, MRI-targeted biopsy using an image-based fusion program was performed in addition to the 12- core systematic biopsy. Patients for whom MRI was performed in other institutions (n=4) and patients who underwent target biopsy alone (n=7) were excluded.Results: Of 574 patients (median prostate-specific antigen [PSA] level, 6.88 ng/mL; mean age, 68.2 years), 342 (59.6%) were diagnosed with prostate cancer (visible lesions=312/449 [69.5%]; nonvisible lesions=30/123 [24.0%]). The detection rates of visible lesions stratified using the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System score (3 vs. 4 vs. 5) were 30.9% (54 of 175), 61.2% (150 of 245), and 90.1% (127 of 141), respectively. Multivariate analysis showed that PSA density was a significant factor for presence of visible lesions, prostate cancer, and significant prostate cancer diagnosis. Among patients with positive lesions, 27 (8.2%) were diagnosed with prostate cancer concomitant with negative systematic biopsy results. A PSA density of 0.15 ng/mL/cm<sup>3</sup> was identified as the significant cutoff value for predicting positive target biopsy in groups with negative systematic biopsy. Sixty of the negative target lesions (26.1%) were diagnosed using systematic biopsy.Conclusions: To maximize cancer detection rates, both targeted and systematic biopsies should be implemented. PSA density was identified as a useful factor for recommending prebiopsy MRI to patients suspected with prostate cancer.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document