Multi-parametric MRI/US fusion guided biopsy for the diagnosis of prostate cancer. Our experience


Cite item

Full Text

Open Access Open Access
Restricted Access Access granted
Restricted Access Subscription or Fee Access

Abstract

Introduction. Prostate cancer is one of the most common types of cancer in men. The gold standard for the detection of prostate cancer is ultrasound guided transrectal prostate biopsy. The detectability of cancer using this method is from 30 to 50%. As a result, many men undergo multiple repeat biopsies for suspected prostate cancer. The European Association of Urology does not give any recommendations on this matter. A revolutionary new method in the diagnosis of prostate cancer is a targeted prostate biopsy using a fusion of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and ultrasound. Materials and methods. At the R.M. Fronstein Clinic of Urology, 55 patients with suspected prostate cancer from September 2017 to January 2018 underwent fusion prostate biopsy. Of them, 21 patients had negative primary biopsies. Two patients had verified prostate cancer. 32 patients did not undergo primary biopsies. Results. The findings of the study suggest that using MRI-ultrasound fusion for guidance of targeted prostate biopsy improves the quality of the histological material, allows patients to avoid unnecessary biopsy, reduces the number of punctures, thereby offering higher diagnostic performance in detecting prostate cancer. MRI-ultrasound fusion targeted biopsy has a high sensitivity in detecting clinically significant cancer and low for clinically insignificant cancers. Conclusion. The technique affords accurate detection of the location and extent of pathological lesions in the prostate thus allowing focal therapy for prostate cancer.

Full Text

Restricted Access

About the authors

P. V Glybochko

I.M. Sechenov First MSMU of Minzdrav of Russia (Sechenov University)

Academician of the RAS, Prof., Dr.Med.Sci., Rector

Yu. G Alyaev

I.M. Sechenov First MSMU of Minzdrav of Russia (Sechenov University)

Email: ugalyaev@mail.ru
Corr.-Member of the RAS, Dr.Med.Sci., Prof., Head of Urology Department

A. V Amosov

I.M. Sechenov First MSMU of Minzdrav of Russia (Sechenov University)

Email: amosov-av@yandex.ru
Dr.Med.Sci., Professor at the R.M. Fronstein Department of Urology

D. V Enikeev

I.M. Sechenov First MSMU of Minzdrav of Russia (Sechenov University)

Email: enikeev_dv@mail.ru
Deputy Director for Science, Research Institute of Uronephrology and Human Reproductive Health

D. V Chinenov

I.M. Sechenov First MSMU of Minzdrav of Russia (Sechenov University)

Email: chinenovdv@rambler.ru
Ph.D., Associate Professor at the R.M. Fronstein Department of Urology

G. E Krupinov

I.M. Sechenov First MSMU of Minzdrav of Russia (Sechenov University)

Email: gekrupinov@mail.ru
Dr.Med.Sci., Professor at the R.M. Fronstein Department of Urology

K. B Puzakov

I.M. Sechenov First MSMU of Minzdrav of Russia (Sechenov University)

Head of the Department of Diagnostic Imaging, UCH № 2

A. V Koshkarev

I.M. Sechenov First MSMU of Minzdrav of Russia (Sechenov University)

Email: Koshkarevalexey@gmail.com
Clinical Resident at the R.M. Fronstein Department of Urology

Yu. V Lerner

I.M. Sechenov First MSMU of Minzdrav of Russia (Sechenov University)

Pathologist at the Department of Anatomic Pathology

N. V Petrovskii

I.M. Sechenov First MSMU of Minzdrav of Russia (Sechenov University)

Ph.D., Associate Professor at the Department of Urology

Z. K Dzhalaev

I.M. Sechenov First MSMU of Minzdrav of Russia (Sechenov University)

Email: dzhalaev.zurab@mail.ru
Ph.D. Student at the R.M. Fronstein Department of Urology

Ya. N Chernov

I.M. Sechenov First MSMU of Minzdrav of Russia (Sechenov University)

Email: yarik/chernov@mail.ru
Ph.D. Student at the Department of Urology

References

  1. Ferlay J. et al. Cancer incidence and mortality worldwide: sources, methods and major patterns in GLOBOCAN 2012. Int J. Cancer. 2015;136:E359.
  2. Haas G.P. et al. The worldwide epidemiology ofprostate cancer: perspectives from autopsy studies. Can J. Urol. 2008;15:3866.
  3. Каприн А.Д., Старинский В.В., Петрова Г.В. Злокачественные новообразования в России в 2014 году (заболеваемость и смертность). М.: ФГБУ «МНИОИ им. П.А. Герцена» Минздрава России. 2016. 250 с.
  4. Roobol M.J. et al. A risk-based strategy improves prostate-specific antigen-driven detection of prostate cancer. Eur Urol. 2010;57:79.
  5. Hara R. et al. Optimal approach for prostate cancer detection as initial biopsy: prospective randomized study comparing transperineal versus transrectal systematic 12-core biopsy. Urology. 2008;71:191.
  6. Takenaka A. et al. A prospective randomized comparison of diagnostic efficacy between transperineal and transrectal 12-core prostate biopsy. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2008;11:134.
  7. Arsov C. et al. Prospective randomized trial comparing magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-guided in-bore biopsy to MRI-ultrasound fusion and transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy in patients with prior negative biopsies. Eur Urol. 2015;68:713.
  8. Walz J. et al. High incidence of prostate cancer detected by saturation biopsy after previous negative biopsy series. Eur Urol. 2006;50:498.
  9. Moran B.J. et al. Re-biopsy of the prostate using a stereotactic transperineal technique. J Urol. 2006;176:1376.
  10. Wegelin O. et al. Comparing Three Different Techniques for Magnetic Resonance Imaging-targeted Prostate Biopsies: A Systematic Review of In-bore versus Magnetic Resonance Imaging-transrectal Ultrasound fusion versus Cognitive Registration. Is There a Preferred Technique? Eur Urol. 2016.
  11. Puech P. et al. Prostate cancer diagnosis: multiparametric MR-targeted biopsy with cognitive and transrectal US-MR fusion guidance versus systematic biopsy--prospective multicenter study. Radiology. 2013;268:461.
  12. Wysock J.S. et al. A prospective, blinded comparison of magnetic resonance (MR) imaging-ultrasound fusion and visual estimation in the performance of MR-targeted prostate biopsy: the PROFUS trial. Eur Urol. 2014;66:343.
  13. Каприн А.Д. и др. Возможности МРТ и ТРУЗИ fusion-навигации при биопсии предстательной железы. Диагностическая и интервенционная радиология. 2016;10(1):51-56.
  14. Weinreb J.C., Barentsz J.O., Choyke P.L. et al. PI-RADS prostate imaging - reporting and data system: 2015, version 2. Eur Urol. 2016;69:16-40.
  15. deRooij M., Hamoen E.H., Futterer J.J. et al. Accuracy of multiparametric MRI for prostate cancer detection: a meta-analysis. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2014;202:343-351.
  16. Martorana E., Pirola G.M., Scialpi M. et al. Lesion volume predicts prostate cancer risk and aggressiveness: validation of its value alone and matched with prostate imaging reporting and data system score. BJU Int. 2017;120:92-103.
  17. Abraham N.E., Mendhiratta N., Taneja S.S. Patterns of repeat prostate biopsy in contemporary clinical practice. J Urol. 2015;193:1178-1184.
  18. Mendhiratta N., Meng X., Rosenkrantz A.B. et al. Prebiopsy MRI and MRI-ultrasound Fusion-targeted Prostate Biopsy in Men With Previous Negative Biopsies: Impact on Repeat Biopsy Strategies. Urology. 2015;86:1192-1198.
  19. Rosenkrantz A.B., Verma S., Choyke P. et al. Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Magnetic Resonance Imaging Targeted Biopsy in Patients with a Prior Negative Biopsy: A Consensus Statement by AUA and SAR. J Urol. 2016;196:1613-1618.
  20. Mendhiratta N., Rosenkrantz A.B., Meng X. et al. Magnetic resonance Imaging-Ultrasound fusion targeted prostate biopsy in a consecutive cohort of men with no previous biopsy: reduction of over detection through improved risk stratification. J Urol. 2015;194:1601-1606.
  21. Meng X., Rosenkrantz A.B., Mendhiratta N. et al. Relationship between prebiopsymultiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), biopsy indication, and MRIultrasound fusion-targeted prostate biopsy outcomes. Eur Urol. 2016;69:512-517.
  22. Tran G.N., Leapman M.S., Nguyen H.G. et al. Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Ultrasound Fusion Biopsy During Prostate Cancer Active Surveillance. Eur Urol 2016. (Epub ahead of print).
  23. MIM Software Inc. 2016. Recommended Acquisition Protocols for Multiparametric MRI Imaging (mpMRI). www.mimsoftware.com.

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML
Download

This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies