Prospective Evaluation of Magnetic Resonance Imaging Guided In-bore Prostate Biopsy versus Systematic Transrectal Ultrasound Guided Prostate Biopsy in Biopsy Naive Men with Elevated Prostate Specific Antigen

被引:92
|
作者
Quentin, Michael [1 ]
Blondin, Dirk [1 ]
Arsov, Christian [2 ]
Schimmoeller, Lars [1 ]
Hiester, Andreas [2 ]
Godehardt, Erhard [3 ]
Albers, Peter [2 ]
Antoch, Gerald [1 ]
Rabenalt, Robert [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Dusseldorf, Dept Diagnost & Intervent Radiol, Fac Med, D-40225 Dusseldorf, Germany
[2] Univ Dusseldorf, Dept Urol, Fac Med, D-40225 Dusseldorf, Germany
[3] Univ Dusseldorf, Div Stat, Fac Med, Dept Cardiovasc Surg, D-40225 Dusseldorf, Germany
来源
JOURNAL OF UROLOGY | 2014年 / 192卷 / 05期
关键词
prostate; prostatic neoplasms; biopsy; magnetic resonance imaging; ultrasonography; CANCER DETECTION; MRI; MORTALITY; TIME;
D O I
10.1016/j.juro.2014.05.090
中图分类号
R5 [内科学]; R69 [泌尿科学(泌尿生殖系疾病)];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Purpose: Magnetic resonance imaging guided biopsy is increasingly performed to diagnose prostate cancer. However, there is a lack of well controlled, prospective trials to support this treatment method. We prospectively compared magnetic resonance imaging guided in-bore biopsy with standard systematic transrectal ultrasound guided biopsy in biopsy naive men with increased prostate specific antigen. Materials and Methods: We performed a prospective study in 132 biopsy naive men with increased prostate specific antigen (greater than 4 ng/ml). After 3 Tesla functional multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging patients were referred for magnetic resonance imaging guided in-bore biopsy of prostate lesions (maximum 3) followed by standard systematic transrectal ultrasound guided biopsy (12 cores). We analyzed the detection rates of prostate cancer and significant prostate cancer (greater than 5 mm total cancer length or any Gleason pattern greater than 3). Results: A total of 128 patients with a mean +/- SD age of 66.1 +/- 8.1 years met all study requirements. Median prostate specific antigen was 6.7 ng/ml (IQR 5.1-9.0). Transrectal ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging guided biopsies provided the same 53.1% detection rate, including 79.4% and 85.3%, respectively, for significant prostate cancer. Magnetic resonance imaging and transrectal ultrasound guided biopsies missed 7.8% and 9.4% of clinically significant prostate cancers, respectively. Magnetic resonance imaging biopsy required significantly fewer cores and revealed a higher percent of cancer involvement per biopsy core (each p < 0.01). Combining the 2 methods provided a 60.9% detection rate with an 82.1% rate for significant prostate cancer. Conclusions: Magnetic resonance imaging guided in-bore and systematic transrectal ultrasound guided biopsies achieved equally high detection rates in biopsy naive patients with increased prostate specific antigen. Magnetic resonance imaging guided in-bore biopsies required significantly fewer cores and revealed a significantly higher percent of cancer involvement per biopsy core.
引用
收藏
页码:1374 / 1379
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Detecting Prostate Cancer A Prospective Comparison of Systematic Prostate Biopsy With Targeted Biopsy Guided by Fused MRI and Transrectal Ultrasound
    Brock, Marko
    von Bodman, Christian
    Palisaar, Jueri
    Becker, Wolfgang
    Martin-Seidel, Philipp
    Noldus, Joachim
    [J]. DEUTSCHES ARZTEBLATT INTERNATIONAL, 2015, 112 (37): : 605 - U13
  • [22] Transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy versus combined magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion and systematic biopsy for prostate cancer detection in routine clinical practice
    Bae, Jae Heung
    Kim, See Hyung
    [J]. ULTRASONOGRAPHY, 2020, 39 (02) : 137 - 143
  • [23] Robotic Transrectal Ultrasound Guided Prostate Biopsy
    Lim, Sunghwan
    Jun, Changhan
    Chang, Doyoung
    Petrisor, Doru
    Han, Misop
    Stoianovici, Dan
    [J]. IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON BIOMEDICAL ENGINEERING, 2019, 66 (09) : 2527 - 2537
  • [24] Comparison between "In-bore" MRI guided prostate biopsy and standard ultrasound guided biopsy in the patient with suspicious prostate cancer: Preliminary results
    D'Agostino, Daniele
    Bianchi, Federico Mineo
    Romagnoli, Daniele
    Corsi, Paolo
    Giampaoli, Marco
    Schiavina, Riccardo
    Brunocilla, Eugenio
    Artibani, Walter
    Porreca, Angelo
    [J]. ARCHIVIO ITALIANO DI UROLOGIA E ANDROLOGIA, 2019, 91 (02) : 87 - 92
  • [25] MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING-GUIDED IN-BORE PROSTATE BIOPSY: THE CORRELATION OF PROSTATE CANCER DETECTION AND NUMBER OF PREVIOUS BIOPSIES
    Blaut, Sebastian
    Roedel, Stefan
    Kittner, Thomas
    Steinbach, Frank
    [J]. JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2018, 199 (04): : E771 - E772
  • [26] The challenge of prostate biopsy guidance in the era of mpMRI detected lesion: ultrasound-guided versus in-bore biopsy
    Jager, Auke
    Vilanova, Joan C.
    Michi, Massimo
    Wijkstra, Hessel
    Oddens, Jorg R.
    [J]. BRITISH JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY, 2022, 95 (1131):
  • [27] Prostate-specific Antigen Parameters and Prostate Health Index Enhance Prostate Cancer Prediction With the In-bore 3-T Magnetic Resonance Imaging-guided Transrectal Targeted Prostate Biopsy After Negative 12-Core Biopsy
    Friedl, Alexander
    Stangl, Kathrin
    Bauer, Wilhelm
    Kivaranovic, Danijel
    Schneeweiss, Jenifer
    Susani, Martin
    Hruby, Stephan
    Lusuardi, Lukas
    Lomoschitz, Fritz
    Eisenhuber-Stadler, Edith
    Schima, Wolfgang
    Broessner, Clemens
    [J]. UROLOGY, 2017, 110 : 148 - 153
  • [28] Comparison of Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Transrectal Ultrasound Informed Prostate Biopsy for Prostate Cancer Diagnosis in Biopsy Naive Men: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    Goldberg, Hanan
    Ahmad, Ardalan E.
    Chandrasekar, Thenappan
    Klotz, Laurence
    Emberton, Mark
    Haider, Masoom A.
    Taneja, Samir S.
    Arora, Karan
    Fleshner, Neil
    Finelli, Antonio
    Perlis, Nathan
    Tyson, Mark D.
    Klaassen, Zachary
    Wallis, Christopher J. D.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2020, 203 (06): : 1085 - 1092
  • [29] The urologist’s learning curve of “in-bore” magnetic resonance-guided prostate biopsy
    Barak Rosenzweig
    Tomer Drori
    Orit Raz
    Gil Goldinger
    Gadi Shlomai
    Dorit E. Zilberman
    Moshe Shechtman
    Jacob Ramon
    Zohar A. Dotan
    Orith Portnoy
    [J]. BMC Urology, 21
  • [30] Re: Magnetic Resonance Imaging Guided Prostate Biopsy in Men With Repeat Negative Biopsies and Increased Prostate Specific Antigen
    Ponholzer, Anton
    Madersbacher, Stephan
    [J]. EUROPEAN UROLOGY, 2011, 60 (01) : 178 - 178