Moving away from systematic biopsies: image-guided prostate biopsy (in-bore biopsy, cognitive fusion biopsy, MRUS fusion biopsy) -literature review.
Magnetic resonance imaging
Prostate cancer
Systematic biopsy
Target biopsy
Journal
World journal of urology
ISSN: 1433-8726
Titre abrégé: World J Urol
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 8307716
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Mar 2021
Mar 2021
Historique:
received:
29
05
2020
accepted:
11
07
2020
pubmed:
31
7
2020
medline:
13
8
2021
entrez:
31
7
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
To compare the detection rate of clinically significant cancer (CSCa) by magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy (MRI-TB) with that by standard systematic biopsy (SB) and to evaluate the role of MRI-TB as a replacement from SB in men at clinical risk of prostate cancer. The non-systematic literature was searched for peer-reviewed English-language articles using PubMed, including the prospective paired studies, where the index test was MRI-TB and the comparator text was SB. Also the randomized clinical trials (RCTs) are included if one arm was MRI-TB and another arm was SB. Eighteen prospective studies used both MRI-TB and TRUS-SB, and eight RCT received one of the tests for prostate cancer detection. In most prospective trials to compare MRI-TB vs. SB, there was no significant difference in any cancer detection rate; however, MRI-TB detected more men with CSCa and fewer men with CISCa than SB. MRI-TB is superior to SB in detection of CSCa. Since some significant cancer was detected by SB only, a combination of SB with the TB technique would avoid the underdiagnosis of CSCa.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32728885
doi: 10.1007/s00345-020-03366-x
pii: 10.1007/s00345-020-03366-x
doi:
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
677-686Références
Stamey TA (1995) Making the most out of six systematic sextant biopsies. Urology 45(1):2–12
doi: 10.1016/S0090-4295(95)96168-2
de la Rosette JJ, Wink MH, Mamoulakis C et al (2009) Optimizing prostate cancer detection: 8 versus 12-core biopsy protocol. J Urol 182(4):1329–1336. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2009.06.037
doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2009.06.037
pubmed: 19683269
Lui PD, Terris MK, Mcneal JE et al (1995) Indications for ultrasound guided transition zone biopsies in the detection of prostate cancer. J Urol 153(3 Pt 2):1000–1003
pubmed: 7853548
Djavan B, Ravery V, Dobronski P et al (2001) Prospective evaluation of prostate cancer detected on biopsies 1, 2, 3 and 4: when should we stop? J Urol 166(5):1679–1683
doi: 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)65652-2
Schoots IG, Roobol MJ, Nieboer D, Bangma CH, Steyerberg EW, Hunink MGM (2015) Magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy may enhance the diagnostic accuracy of significant prostate cancer detection compared to standard transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy : a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol 68(3):438–450. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2014.11.037
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2014.11.037
pubmed: 25480312
Kasivisvanathan V, Stabile A, Neves JB, Giganti F, Novara G (2019) Magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy versus systematic biopsy in the detection of prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2019.04.043
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2019.04.043
pubmed: 31780103
Da Rosa MR, Milot L, Sugar L et al (2015) A prospective comparison of MRI-US fused targeted biopsy versus systematic ultrasound-guided biopsy for detecting clinically significant prostate cancer in patients on active surveillance. J Magn Reson Imaging 41(1):220–225. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.24710
doi: 10.1002/jmri.24710
pubmed: 25044935
Diaz AW, Hoang AN, Turkbey B et al (2020) Can magnetic resonance-ultrasound fusion biopsy improve. J Urol 190(6):2020–2025. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2013.05.118
doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2013.05.118
Baco E, Ukimura O, Rud E et al (2015) Magnetic resonance imaging-transectal ultrasound image-fusion biopsies accurately characterize the index tumor: correlation with step-sectioned radical prostatectomy specimens in 135 patients. Eur Urol 67(4):787–794. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2014.08.077
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2014.08.077
pubmed: 25240973
Rastinehad AR, Turkbey B, Salami SS et al (2014) Improving detection of clinically significant prostate cancer: magnetic resonance imaging/transrectal ultrasound fusion guided prostate biopsy. J Urol 191(6):1749–1754. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2013.12.007
doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2013.12.007
pubmed: 24333515
Delongchamps NB, Portalez D, Bruguière E et al (2016) Are MRI-TRUS-guided targeted biopsies non-inferior to TRUS-guided systematic biopsies for the detection of prostate cancer in patients with a single suspicious focus on multiparametric prostate MRI? Results of a multicentric controlled trial. J Urol. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2016.04.003
doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2016.04.003
pubmed: 27079582
Borkowetz A, Platzek I, Toma M et al (2015) Comparison of systematic transrectal biopsy to transperineal magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound-fusion biopsy for the diagnosis of prostate cancer. BJU Int 116(6):873–879. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.13023
doi: 10.1111/bju.13023
pubmed: 25523210
Rosario DJ, Walton TJ, Kennish SJ (2018) In-bore multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging targeted biopsy: as good as it gets? Eur Urol 75(4):579–581. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2018.12.001
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2018.12.001
pubmed: 30558900
Lee DJ, Recabal P, Sjoberg DD et al (2016) Comparative effectiveness of targeted prostate biopsy using MRI-US fusion software and visual targeting: a prospective study. J Urol. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2016.03.149
doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2016.03.149
pubmed: 27986530
pmcid: 7119006
Wegelin O, van Melick HHE, Hooft L, Bosch JLHR, Reitsma HB, Barentsz JO, Somford DM (2017) 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 71(4):517–531. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2016.07.041
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2016.07.041
pubmed: 27568655
Yamada Y, Fujihara A, Shiraishi T et al (2019) Magnetic resonance imaging/transrectal ultrasound fusion-targeted prostate biopsy using three-dimensional ultrasound-based organ-tracking technology: initial experience in Japan. Int J Urol. https://doi.org/10.1111/iju.13924
doi: 10.1111/iju.13924
pubmed: 31721315
Ukimura O, Marien A, Palmer S et al (2015) Trans-rectal ultrasound visibility of prostate lesions identified by magnetic resonance imaging increases accuracy of image-fusion targeted biopsies. World J Urol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-015-1501-z
doi: 10.1007/s00345-015-1501-z
pubmed: 26162845
pmcid: 7721864
Ukimura O, Desai MM, Palmer S et al (2012) 3-Dimensional elastic registration system of prostate biopsy location by real-time 3-dimensional transrectal ultrasound guidance with magnetic resonance/transrectal ultrasound image fusion. J Urol 187(3):1080–1086. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2011.10.124
doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2011.10.124
pubmed: 22266005
Study PM, Leroy X, Comperat E (2013) Prostate cancer diagnosis: multiparametric MR-targeted biopsy with cognitive and transrectal US-MR fusion guidance versus systematic biopsy —prospective multicentre study. Radiology 268(2):461–469. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.13121501/-/DC1
doi: 10.1148/radiol.13121501/-/DC1
Kuru TH, Roethke MC, Seidenader J et al (2013) Critical evaluation of magnetic resonance imaging targeted, transrectal ultrasound guided transperineal fusion biopsy for detection of prostate cancer. J Urol 190(4):1380–1386. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2013.04.043
doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2013.04.043
pubmed: 23608676
Wysock JS, Rosenkrantz AB, Huang WC et al (2014) 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 66(2):343–351. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2013.10.048
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2013.10.048
pubmed: 24262102
Sonn GA, Chang E, Natarajan S et al (2014) Value of targeted prostate biopsy using magnetic resonance-ultrasound fusion in men with prior negative biopsy and elevated prostate-specific antigen. Eur Urol 65(4):809–815. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2013.03.025
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2013.03.025
pubmed: 23523537
Mozer P, Rouprêt M, Le CC et al (2015) First round of targeted biopsies using magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasonography fusion compared with conventional transrectal ultrasonography-guided biopsies for the diagnosis of localised prostate cancer. BJU Int 115(1):50–57. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.12690
doi: 10.1111/bju.12690
pubmed: 24552477
Quentin M, Blondin D, Arsov C et al (2014) Prospective evaluation of magnetic resonance imaging guided in-bore prostate biopsy versus systematic transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy in biopsy na €ıve men with elevated prostate specific antigen. J Urol 192:1374–1379. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2014.05.090
doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2014.05.090
pubmed: 24866597
Passoni M, Polascik TJ, Parkinson R et al (2014) Prospective study of diagnostic accuracy comparing prostate cancer detection by transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy versus magnetic resonance (MR) imaging with subsequent MR-guided biopsy in men without previous prostate biopsies. Eur Urol 66:22–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2014.03.002
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2014.03.002
Maxeiner A, Stephan C, Durmus T, Slowinski T, Cash H, Fischer T (2015) Added value of multiparametric ultrasonography in magnetic resonance. Urology 86(1):108–114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2015.01.055
doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2015.01.055
pubmed: 26142593
Peyronnet B, De GA, Roupr M et al (2015) Oncology: prostate/testis/penis/urethra accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound fusion targeted biopsies to diagnose clinically significant prostate cancer in enlarged compared to smaller prostates. J Urol. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2015.03.025
doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2015.03.025
pubmed: 26612196
Mendhiratta N, Rosenkrantz AB, Meng X et al (2015) 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 194(6):1601–1606. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2015.06.078
doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2015.06.078
pubmed: 26100327
Siddiqui MM, Rais-Bahrami S, Turkbey B et al (2015) Comparison of MR/ultrasound fusion-guided biopsy with ultrasound-guided biopsy for the diagnosis of prostate cancer. JAMA 313(4):390–397. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2014.17942
doi: 10.1001/jama.2014.17942
pubmed: 25626035
pmcid: 4572575
Filson CP, Natarajan S, Margolis DJA, Huang J, Lieu P (2016) Prostate cancer detection with magnetic resonance-ultrasound fusion biopsy: the role of systematic and targeted biopsies. Cancer. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.29874
doi: 10.1002/cncr.29874
pubmed: 27377470
pmcid: 6192520
Rouvi O, Delongchamps NB, Portalez D et al (2016) Are magnetic resonance imaging-transrectal ultrasound guided targeted biopsies noninferior to transrectal ultrasound guided systematic biopsies for the detection of prostate cancer? J Urol 196:1069–1075. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2016.04.003
doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2016.04.003
Jelidi A, Ohana M, Labani A, Alemann G, Lang H, Roy C (2017) Prostate cancer diagnosis: efficacy of a simple electromagnetic MRI-TRUS fusion method to target biopsies. Eur J Radiol 86:127–134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2016.11.016
doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2016.11.016
pubmed: 28027738
Paper O (2017) Urologia a prospective comparison of selective multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging fusion-targeted and systematic transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsies for detecting prostate cancer in men undergoing repeated biopsies. Urol Int 99(4):384–391. https://doi.org/10.1159/000477214
doi: 10.1159/000477214
Rouvière O, Puech P, Renard-penna R et al (2019) Use of prostate systematic and targeted biopsy on the basis of multiparametric MRI in biopsy-naive patients (MRI-FIRST): a prospective, multicentre, paired diagnostic study. Lancet Oncol 20(1):100–109. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(18)30569-2
doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(18)30569-2
pubmed: 30470502
Elkhoury FF, Feller ER, Kwan L et al (2019) Comparison of targeted vs. systematic prostate biopsy in men who are biopsy naive: the prospective assessment of image registration in the diagnosis of prostate cancer (PAREDCAP) Study. JAMA Surg 154(9):811–818. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamasurg.2019.1734
doi: 10.1001/jamasurg.2019.1734
pubmed: 31188412
pmcid: 6563598
Kuru TH, Roethke MC, Seidenader J et al (2013) New technology and techniques critical evaluation of magnetic resonance imaging targeted, transrectal ultrasound guided transperineal fusion biopsy for detection of prostate cancer. J Urol 190:1380–1386. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2013.04.043
doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2013.04.043
pubmed: 23608676
Park BK, Park JW, Park SY et al (2011) Genitourinary imaging original research. Am J Radiol. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.11.6829
doi: 10.2214/AJR.11.6829
Arsov C, Rabenalt R, Blondin D et al (2015) 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 68:713–720. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2015.06.008
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2015.06.008
pubmed: 26116294
Baco E, Rud E, Magne L et al (2016) A randomized controlled trial to assess and compare the outcomes of two-core prostate biopsy guided by fused magnetic resonance and transrectal ultrasound images and traditional 12-core systematic biopsy. Eur Urol 69(1):149–156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2015.03.041
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2015.03.041
pubmed: 25862143
Taverna G, Bozzini G, Grizzi F et al (2016) Endorectal multiparametric 3-tesla magnetic resonance imaging associated with systematic cognitive biopsies does not increase prostate cancer detection rate: a randomized prospective trial. World J Urol 34(6):797–803. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-015-1711-4
doi: 10.1007/s00345-015-1711-4
pubmed: 26481226
Panebianco V, Barchetti F et al (2015) Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging vs. standard care in men being evaluated for prostate cancer: a randomized study. Urol Oncol 33(1):17.e1–17.e7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urolonc.2014.09.013
doi: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2014.09.013
Piippo U, Kauppila S, Tonttila PP et al (2016) Prebiopsy multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging for prostate cancer diagnosis in biopsy-naive men with suspected prostate cancer based on elevated prostate-specific antigen values: results from a randomized prospective blinded controlled trial. Eur Urol 69:419–425. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2015.05.024
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2015.05.024
pubmed: 26033153
Porpiglia F, Manfredi M, Mele F et al (2017) Diagnostic pathway with multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging versus standard pathway: results from a randomized prospective study in biopsy-naïve patients with suspected prostate cancer. Eur Urol 72(2):282–288. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2016.08.041
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2016.08.041
pubmed: 27574821
Kassivisvanathan V, Ranniko AS, Borghi M et al (2018) MRI-targeted or standard biopsy for prostate-cancer diagnosis. N Engl J Med 378(19):1767–1777. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1801993
doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1801993
Rud E, Klotz D, Rennesund K et al (2014) Detection of the index tumour and tumour volume in prostate cancer using T2-weighted and diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) alone. BJU Int 114(6b):E32–42. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.12637
doi: 10.1111/bju.12637
pubmed: 24447606
Wegelin O, Exterkate L, Van der Leest M et al (2019) Complications and adverse events of three magnetic resonance imaging-based target biopsy techniques in the diagnosis of prostate cancer among men with prior negative biopsies: results from the FUTURE trial, a multicentre randomised controlled trial. Eur Urol Oncol 2(6):617–624. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euo.2019.08.007
doi: 10.1016/j.euo.2019.08.007
pubmed: 31519516
Connor MJ, Eldred-Evans D, van Son M et al (2020) A multicentre study of the clinical utility of non-targeted systematic transperineal prostate biopsies in patients undergoing pre-biopsy mpMRI. J Urol. https://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000001184
doi: 10.1097/JU.0000000000001184
pubmed: 33207137