Prebiopsy Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Prostate Cancer Detection: Comparison of Random and Targeted Biopsies

Delongchamps, Nicolas Barry; Peyromaure, Michaël; Schull, A.; Beuvon, Frédéric; Bouazza, Naïm; Flam, T.; Zerbib, Marc; Muradyan, Naira; Legman, P.; Cornud, F.

doi:10.1016/j.juro.2012.08.195

Cited by 248 publications

(188 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

164

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…A total of 8663 original studies in English were identified and 15 were analyzed. [2][3][4][6][7][8][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31] The overall quality varied from low to moderate. Fourteen conference abstracts will require followup in future updated versions.…”

Section: Literature Search Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…• Eight eligible studies 2,3,6,7,[23][24][25][26] addressed the first objective. The quality of evidence ranged from poor to moderate.…”

Section: Key Evidencementioning

confidence: 99%

“…1 The current standard method to diagnose clinically significant prostate cancer (CSPC) is transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided systematic biopsy (10-12 cores), 2 which may over-diagnose non-CSPC or miss CSPC in patients in the first or repeated biopsy settings. 3,4 The template transperineal mapping biopsy or saturation biopsy technique should be more sensitive, but are more invasive than TRUS-guided systematic biopsy. 5 Recently, there have been several publications investigating whether multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) techniques improve the diagnostic accuracy of CSPC.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Evidence-based guideline recommendations on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of prostate cancer: A Cancer Care Ontario clinical practice guideline

Haider

Yao

Loblaw

et al. 2017

CUAJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cite as: Can Urol Assoc J 2017;11(1-2):E1-7. http://dx.doi.org/10.5489/cuaj.3968 Published online January 12, 2017 AbstractThis clinical guideline focuses on: 1) the use of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) in diagnosing clinically significant prostate cancer (CSPC) in patients with an elevated risk of CSPC and who are biopsy-naïve; and 2) the use of mpMRI in diagnosing CSPC in patients with a persistently elevated risk of having CSPC and who have a negative transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided systematic biopsy.

show abstract

Section: Literature Search Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…• Eight eligible studies 2,3,6,7,[23][24][25][26] addressed the first objective. The quality of evidence ranged from poor to moderate.…”

Section: Key Evidencementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Evidence-based guideline recommendations on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of prostate cancer: A Cancer Care Ontario clinical practice guideline

Haider

Yao

Loblaw

et al. 2017

CUAJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…[1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12] Targeted biopsy of MP-MRI lesions can be performed directly using MRI [8][9][10] or under ultrasound guidance using cognitive targeting or MRI-TRUS fusion software. 6,13 Needle insertion can be transrectal or transperineal under ultrasound guidance.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of prostate MRI-3D transrectal ultrasound fusion biopsy for first-time and repeat biopsy patients with previous atypical small acinar proliferation

Cool

Romagnoli

Izawa

et al. 2016

CUAJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: This study evaluates the clinical benefit of magnetic resonance-transrectal ultrasound (MR-TRUS) fusion biopsy over systematic biopsy between first-time and repeat prostate biopsy patients with prior atypical small acinar proliferation (ASAP). Materials: 100 patients were enrolled in a single-centre prospective cohort study: 50 for first biopsy, 50 for repeat biopsy with prior ASAP. Multiparameteric magnetic resonance imaging (MP-MRI) and standard 12-core ultrasound biopsy (Std-Bx) were performed on all patients. Targeted biopsy using MRI-TRUS fusion (Fn-Bx) was performed f suspicious lesions were identified on the prebiopsy MP-MRI. Classification of clinically significant disease was assessed independently for the Std-Bx vs. Fn-Bx cores to compare the two approaches. Results: Adenocarcinoma was detected in 49/100 patients (26 first biopsy, 23 ASAP biopsy), with 25 having significant disease (17 first, 8 ASAP). Fn-Bx demonstrated significantly higher per-core cancer detection rates, cancer involvement, and Gleason scores for first-time and ASAP patients. However, Fn-Bx was significantly more likely to detect significant cancer missed on Std-Bx for ASAP patients than first-time biopsy patients. The addition of Fn-Bx to Std-Bx for ASAP patients had a 166.7% relative risk reduction for missing Gleason ≥ 3 + 4 disease (number needed to image with MP-MRI=10 patients) compared to 6.3% for first biopsy (number to image=50 patients). Negative predictive value of MP-MRI for negative biopsy was 79% for first-time and 100% for ASAP patients, with median followup of 32.1 ± 15.5 months. Conclusions: MR-TRUS Fn-Bx has a greater clinical impact for repeat biopsy patients with prior ASAP than biopsy-naïve patients by detecting more significant cancers that are missed on Std-Bx.

show abstract

“…For performing the fusion between the two volumes, elastic systems take into consideration prostate movements and deformation during the insertion of the US probe, whereas rigid systems relay only on internal anatomical markers [49]. Delongchamps et al [50] showed that elastic image fusion was more accurate for cancer detection than rigid image fusion, which performed similarly with cognitive guided biopsy [51].…”

Section: Ultrasound-mri-guided Prostate Biopsymentioning

confidence: 99%

Prostate ultrasound: back in business!

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The use of grey scale prostate ultrasound decreased after the implementation of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for the diagnosis and evaluation of prostate cancer. The new developments, such as multiparametric ultrasound and MRI-ultrasound fusion technology, renewed the interest for this imaging method in the assessment of prostate cancer. The purpose of this paper was to review the current role of prostate ultrasound in the setting of these new applications. A thorough reevaluation of the selection criteria of the patients is required to assess which patients would benefit from multiparametric ultrasound, who wouldbenefit from multiparametric MRI or the combination of both to assist prostate biopsy in order to ensure the balance between overdiagnosis and underdiagnosis of prostate cancer.

show abstract

Prebiopsy Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Prostate Cancer Detection: Comparison of Random and Targeted Biopsies

Cited by 248 publications

References 21 publications

Evidence-based guideline recommendations on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of prostate cancer: A Cancer Care Ontario clinical practice guideline

Evidence-based guideline recommendations on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of prostate cancer: A Cancer Care Ontario clinical practice guideline

Comparison of prostate MRI-3D transrectal ultrasound fusion biopsy for first-time and repeat biopsy patients with previous atypical small acinar proliferation

Prostate ultrasound: back in business!

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About