Skip to main content
Hauptrubriken
CME Facharzt-Training Webinare Zeitschriften Bücher e.Medpedia Podcast
Service
Jobbörse Info & Hilfe
Fachgebiete
Anästhesiologie Allgemeinmedizin Arbeitsmedizin Augenheilkunde Chirurgie Dermatologie Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe HNO Innere Medizin Kardiologie Neurologie Onkologie und Hämatologie Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie Pädiatrie Pathologie Psychiatrie Radiologie Rechtsmedizin Urologie Zahnmedizin
Themen
Klimawandel und Gesundheit Neues aus dem Markt COVID-19 Praxis und Beruf Seltene Erkrankungen GOÄ & EBM Panorama
Sammlungen
Kasuistiken Algorithmen & Infografiken Blickdiagnosen Arthropedia FlapFinder (für Dermatochirurgen) Videos Kongressberichterstattung Medizin für Apothekerinnen und Apotheker Für Ärztinnen und Ärzte in Weiterbildung Für Medizinstudierende

Live-Webinar: Aktuelle Leitlinien bei Herz-Kreislauf-Erkrankungen

Konkret geht es um den Diabetes-Patienten mit kardiovaskulären Erkrankungen oder Risiken, die Herzinsuffizienz sowie die kardiovaskuläre Primär- und Sekundärprävention. Sind Sie hier schon auf dem neuesten Stand? Unsere Experten beleuchten, wo und warum das bisherige Procedere geändert werden soll und was in der Praxis sinnvoll ist. Holen Sie sich Ihr Update und 2 CME-Punkte beim MMW-Webinar am 24. April von 17.30 bis 19 Uhr. 
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
Abdominal Radiology
Erschienen in: Abdominal Radiology 5/2016

02.05.2016

A urologist’s perspective on prostate cancer imaging: past, present, and future

verfasst von: Arvin K. George, Baris Turkbey, Subin G. Valayil, Akhil Muthigi, Francesca Mertan, Michael Kongnyuy, Peter A. Pinto

Erschienen in: Abdominal Radiology | Ausgabe 5/2016

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Prostate cancer is unique in that unlike other solid organ malignancies, only recently has imaging been employed to routinely detect and localize disease. The introduction of transrectal ultrasound was a significant development, transitioning digitally guided prostate biopsies to ultrasound guidance. The arrival of multiparametric MRI has become the next major step, transforming the way Urologist’s diagnose, stage, and treat prostate cancer. Recent recommendations against PSA screening have changed the landscape of urologic oncology with the changing needs being reflected in the initiation of additional robust imaging techniques at different time points in prostate cancer care. The current review aims to provide a clinical perspective in the history, current standard of care, and novel imaging modalities in the evaluation of prostate cancer.
Literatur
1.
Dellavedova T (2016) Prostatic specific antigen. From its early days until becoming a prostate cancer biomarker. Arch Esp Urol 69(1):19–23PubMed
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Fascelli M, et al. (2015) The role of MRI in active surveillance for prostate cancer. Curr Urol Rep 16(6):42PubMedCrossRef
7.
Lee F, et al. (1985) Transrectal ultrasound in the diagnosis of prostate cancer: location, echogenicity, histopathology, and staging. Prostate 7(2):117–129PubMedCrossRef
8.
Ragde H, Aldape HC, Bagley CM Jr (1988) Ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy. Biopty gun superior to aspiration. Urology 32(6):503–506PubMedCrossRef
9.
Frye TP, Pinto PA, George AK (2015) Optimizing patient population for MP-MRI and fusion biopsy for prostate cancer detection. Curr Urol Rep 16(7):50PubMedCrossRef
10.
11.
Watanabe H, et al. (1974) Development and application of new equipment for transrectal ultrasonography. J Clin Ultrasound 2(2):91–98PubMedCrossRef
12.
Resnick MI, Willard JW, Boyce WH (1980) Transrectal ultrasonography in the evaluation of patients with prostatic carcinoma. J Urol 124(4):482–484PubMed
13.
Rifkin MD, et al. (1983) Endoscopic ultrasonic evaluation of the prostate using a transrectal probe: prospective evaluation and acoustic characterization. Radiology 149(1):265–271PubMedCrossRef
14.
Griffiths GJ, et al. (1987) The ultrasound appearances of prostatic cancer with histological correlation. Clin Radiol 38(3):219–227PubMedCrossRef
15.
Egawa S, et al. (1992) Unusual hyperechoic appearance of prostate cancer on transrectal ultrasonography. Br J Urol 69(2):169–174PubMedCrossRef
16.
Lee F, et al. (1989) Hypoechoic lesions of the prostate: clinical relevance of tumor size, digital rectal examination, and prostate-specific antigen. Radiology 170(1 Pt 1):29–32PubMedCrossRef
17.
Hodge KK, et al. (1989) Random systematic versus directed ultrasound guided transrectal core biopsies of the prostate. J Urol 142(1):71–74 (discussion 74–5)PubMed
18.
Barrett T, et al. (2012) Value of the hemorrhage exclusion sign on T1-weighted prostate MR images for the detection of prostate cancer. Radiology 263(3):751–757PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
19.
20.
Kirkham AP, Emberton M, Allen C (2006) How good is MRI at detecting and characterising cancer within the prostate. Eur Urol 50(6):1163–1174 (discussion 1175)PubMedCrossRef
21.
McNeal JE, et al. (1988) Zonal distribution of prostatic adenocarcinoma. Correlation with histologic pattern and direction of spread. Am J Surg Pathol 12(12):897–906PubMedCrossRef
22.
Sakai I, et al. (2006) Analysis of differences in clinicopathological features between prostate cancers located in the transition and peripheral zones. Int J Urol 13(4):368–372PubMedCrossRef
23.
Iremashvili V, et al. (2012) Prostate cancers of different zonal origin: clinicopathological characteristics and biochemical outcome after radical prostatectomy. Urology 80(5):1063–1069PubMedCrossRef
24.
Beyersdorff D, et al. (2002) Patients with a history of elevated prostate-specific antigen levels and negative transrectal US-guided quadrant or sextant biopsy results: value of MR imaging. Radiology 224(3):701–706PubMedCrossRef
25.
Presti JC Jr, et al. (1996) Local staging of prostatic carcinoma: comparison of transrectal sonography and endorectal MR imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol 166(1):103–108PubMedCrossRef
26.
Stattin P, et al. (2015) Improving the specificity of screening for lethal prostate cancer using prostate-specific antigen and a panel of kallikrein markers: a nested case-control study. Eur Urol 68(2):207–213PubMedCrossRef
27.
Tinzl M, et al. (2004) DD3PCA3 RNA analysis in urine–a new perspective for detecting prostate cancer. Eur Urol 46(2):182–186 (discussion 187)PubMedCrossRef
28.
Catalona WJ, et al. (2011) A multicenter study of [-2]pro-prostate specific antigen combined with prostate specific antigen and free prostate specific antigen for prostate cancer detection in the 2.0 to 10.0 ng/ml prostate specific antigen range. J Urol 185(5):1650–1655PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
29.
30.
McDonald ML, Parsons JK (2016) 4-kallikrein test and kallikrein markers in prostate cancer screening. Urol Clin North Am 43(1):39–46PubMedCrossRef
31.
Mohler JL, et al. (2016) Prostate Cancer, version 1.2016. J Natl Compr Cancer Netw 14(1):19–30
32.
Serefoglu EC, et al. (2013) How reliable is 12-core prostate biopsy procedure in the detection of prostate cancer? Can Urol Assoc J 7(5–6):E293–E298PubMedPubMedCentral
33.
Volkin D, et al. (2014) Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and subsequent MRI/ultrasonography fusion-guided biopsy increase the detection of anteriorly located prostate cancers. BJU Int 114(6b):E43–E49PubMedCrossRef
34.
Nevoux P, et al. (2012) Quantitative tissue analyses of prostate cancer foci in an unselected cystoprostatectomy series. BJU Int 110(4):517–523PubMedCrossRef
35.
Tawadros T, Valerio M (2016) Addressing overtreatment following the diagnosis of localized prostate cancer. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther 16:373–374PubMedCrossRef
36.
Rastinehad AR, et al. (2014) Improving detection of clinically significant prostate cancer: magnetic resonance imaging/transrectal ultrasound fusion guided prostate biopsy. J Urol 191(6):1749–1754PubMedCrossRef
37.
Siddiqui MM, et al. (2015) Comparison of MR/ultrasound fusion-guided biopsy with ultrasound-guided biopsy for the diagnosis of prostate cancer. Jama 313(4):390–397PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
38.
Turkbey B, et al. (2014) Comparison of endorectal coil and nonendorectal coil T2W and diffusion-weighted MRI at 3 Tesla for localizing prostate cancer: correlation with whole-mount histopathology. J Magn Reson Imaging 39(6):1443–1448PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
39.
Lourenco AP, et al. (2014) Improving outcomes of screening breast MRI with practice evolution: initial clinical experience with 3T compared to 1.5T. J Magn Reson Imaging 39(3):535–539PubMedCrossRef
40.
Torricelli P, et al. (2008) 3-T MRI with phased-array coil in local staging of prostatic cancer. Acad Radiol 15(9):1118–1125PubMedCrossRef
41.
42.
Weinreb JC, et al. (2016) PI-RADS prostate imaging: reporting and data system: 2015, Version 2. Eur Urol 69(1):16–40PubMedCrossRef
43.
Dwivedi DK, et al. (2016) Stratification of the aggressiveness of prostate cancer using pre-biopsy multiparametric MRI (mpMRI). NMR Biomed 29:232–238PubMedCrossRef
44.
Muller BG, et al. (2015) Prostate cancer: interobserver agreement and accuracy with the revised prostate imaging reporting and data system at multiparametric MR imaging. Radiology 277(3):741–750PubMedCrossRef
45.
Weinreb JC, et al. (2009) Prostate cancer: sextant localization at MR imaging and MR spectroscopic imaging before prostatectomy–results of ACRIN prospective multi-institutional clinicopathologic study. Radiology 251(1):122–133PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
46.
Park SY, et al. (2016) Prostate cancer: PI-RADS version 2 helps preoperatively predict clinically significant cancers. Radiology 2:151133CrossRef
47.
48.
49.
Kongnyuy M, et al. (2015) A case of In-bore transperineal MRI-guided prostate biopsy of a patient with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis. Case Rep Urol 2015:676930PubMedPubMedCentral
50.
51.
Kongnyuy M, et al. (2016) Magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion-guided prostate biopsy: review of technology, techniques, and outcomes. Curr Urol Rep 17(4):32PubMedCrossRef
52.
Sonn GA, et al. (2014) Initial experience with electronic tracking of specific tumor sites in men undergoing active surveillance of prostate cancer. Urol Oncol 32(7):952–957PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
53.
Sankineni S, et al. (2015) Posterior subcapsular prostate cancer: identification with mpMRI and MRI/TRUS fusion-guided biopsy. Abdom Imaging 40(7):2557–2565PubMedCrossRef
54.
55.
Delongchamps NB, et al. (2013) Prebiopsy magnetic resonance imaging and prostate cancer detection: comparison of random and targeted biopsies. J Urol 189(2):493–499PubMedCrossRef
56.
Vourganti S, et al. (2012) Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasound fusion biopsy detect prostate cancer in patients with prior negative transrectal ultrasound biopsies. J Urol 188(6):2152–2157PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
57.
Edge SB, Compton CC (2010) The American Joint Committee on Cancer: the 7th edition of the AJCC cancer staging manual and the future of TNM. Ann Surg Oncol 17(6):1471–1474PubMedCrossRef
58.
Muller BG, et al. (2015) Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging-transrectal ultrasound fusion-assisted biopsy for the diagnosis of local recurrence after radical prostatectomy. Urol Oncol 33(10):425.e1–425.e6CrossRef
59.
Gupta RT, et al. (2014) Comparing 3-T multiparametric MRI and the partin tables to predict organ-confined prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy. Urol Oncol 32(8):1292–1299PubMedCrossRef
60.
Raskolnikov D, et al. (2015) The role of magnetic resonance image guided prostate biopsy in stratifying men for risk of extracapsular extension at radical prostatectomy. J Urol 194(1):105–111PubMedCrossRef
61.
Raskolnikov D, et al. (2014) Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and image-guided biopsy to detect seminal vesicle invasion by prostate cancer. J Endourol 28(11):1283–1289PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
62.
Thoeny HC, et al. (2014) Metastases in normal-sized pelvic lymph nodes: detection with diffusion-weighted MR imaging. Radiology 273(1):125–135PubMedCrossRef
63.
Saokar A, et al. (2010) Detection of lymph nodes in pelvic malignancies with computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging. Clin Imaging 34(5):361–366PubMedCrossRef
64.
Lecouvet FE, et al. (2012) Can whole-body magnetic resonance imaging with diffusion-weighted imaging replace Tc 99 m bone scanning and computed tomography for single-step detection of metastases in patients with high-risk prostate cancer? Eur Urol 62(1):68–75PubMedCrossRef
65.
Hovels AM, et al. (2008) The diagnostic accuracy of CT and MRI in the staging of pelvic lymph nodes in patients with prostate cancer: a meta-analysis. Clin Radiol 63(4):387–395PubMedCrossRef
66.
Carlin BI, Andriole GL (2000) The natural history, skeletal complications, and management of bone metastases in patients with prostate carcinoma. Cancer 88(12 Suppl):2989–2994PubMedCrossRef
67.
Bjurlin MA, et al. (2015) Imaging and evaluation of patients with high-risk prostate cancer. Nat Rev Urol 12(11):617–628PubMedCrossRef
68.
69.
Damle NA, et al. (2013) The role of 18F-fluoride PET-CT in the detection of bone metastases in patients with breast, lung and prostate carcinoma: a comparison with FDG PET/CT and 99mTc-MDP bone scan. Jpn J Radiol 31(4):262–269PubMedCrossRef
70.
Langsteger W, et al. (2012) Imaging of bone metastases in prostate cancer: an update. Q J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 56(5):447–458PubMed
71.
Perlmutter MA, Lepor H (2007) Androgen deprivation therapy in the treatment of advanced prostate cancer. Rev Urol 9(Suppl 1):S3–S8PubMedPubMedCentral
72.
Hawkins T, Halewood MM (2008) Technical note: identifying the prostate cancer ‘superscan’ by quantitative skeletal scintigraphy. Nucl Med Commun 29(7):654–659PubMedCrossRef
73.
Buckley O, et al. (2007) 99mTc bone scintigraphy superscans: a review. Nucl Med Commun 28(7):521–527PubMedCrossRef
74.
Leung D, et al. (2014) Imaging approaches with advanced prostate cancer: techniques and timing. Can J Urol 21(2 Supp 1):42–47PubMed
75.
Ghanem N, et al. (2005) Diagnostic value of MRI in comparison to scintigraphy, PET, MS-CT and PET/CT for the detection of metastases of bone. Eur J Radiol 55(1):41–55PubMedCrossRef
76.
Shen G, et al. (2014) Comparison of choline-PET/CT, MRI, SPECT, and bone scintigraphy in the diagnosis of bone metastases in patients with prostate cancer: a meta-analysis. Skeletal Radiol 43(11):1503–1513PubMedCrossRef
77.
Mitchell CR, et al. (2013) Operational characteristics of (11)c-choline positron emission tomography/computerized tomography for prostate cancer with biochemical recurrence after initial treatment. J Urol 189(4):1308–1313PubMedCrossRef
78.
Evangelista L, et al. (2013) Utility of choline positron emission tomography/computed tomography for lymph node involvement identification in intermediate- to high-risk prostate cancer: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol 63(6):1040–1048PubMedCrossRef
79.
Evangelista L, et al. (2013) Choline PET or PET/CT and biochemical relapse of prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Nucl Med 38(5):305–314PubMedCrossRef
80.
81.
Park BH, et al. (2014) Influence of magnetic resonance imaging in the decision to preserve or resect neurovascular bundles at robotic assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. J Urol 192(1):82–88PubMedCrossRef
82.
Tabatabaei S, et al. (2011) Prostate cancer imaging: what surgeons, radiation oncologists, and medical oncologists want to know. AJR Am J Roentgenol 196(6):1263–1266PubMedCrossRef
83.
84.
85.
Ghai S, et al. (2015) Real-time MRI-guided focused ultrasound for focal therapy of locally confined low-risk prostate cancer: feasibility and preliminary outcomes. AJR Am J Roentgenol 205(2):W177–W184PubMedCrossRef
86.
Ahmed HU, et al. (2015) Focal ablation targeted to the index lesion in multifocal localised prostate cancer: a prospective development study. Eur Urol 68(6):927–936PubMedCrossRef
87.
Okoro C, et al. (2015) Magnetic resonance imaging/transrectal ultrasonography fusion prostate biopsy significantly outperforms systematic 12-core biopsy for prediction of total magnetic resonance imaging tumor volume in active surveillance patients. J Endourol 29(10):1115–1121PubMedCrossRef
88.
WaltonDiaz A, et al. (2015) Use of serial multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in the management of patients with prostate cancer on active surveillance. Urol Oncol 33(5):202.e1–202.e7CrossRef
89.
Raskolnikov D, et al. (2015) The role of image guided biopsy targeting in patients with atypical small acinar proliferation. J Urol 193(2):473–478PubMedCrossRef
90.
91.
Hu JC, et al. (2014) Targeted prostate biopsy in select men for active surveillance: do the Epstein criteria still apply? J Urol 192(2):385–390PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
92.
Moyer VA (2012) Screening for prostate cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med 157(2):120–134PubMedCrossRef
93.
94.
95.
Shakir NA, et al. (2014) Identification of threshold prostate specific antigen levels to optimize the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer by magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound fusion guided biopsy. J Urol 192(6):1642–1648PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
96.
97.
Ciccarese C, et al. (2016) Metabolic alterations in renal and prostate cancer. Curr Drug Metab 17(2):150–155PubMedCrossRef
98.
Albers MJ, et al. (2008) Hyperpolarized 13C lactate, pyruvate, and alanine: noninvasive biomarkers for prostate cancer detection and grading. Cancer Res 68(20):8607–8615PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
99.
Nelson SJ, et al. (2013) Metabolic imaging of patients with prostate cancer using hyperpolarized [1-(1)(3)C]pyruvate. Sci Trans Med 5(198):198ra108CrossRef
100.
101.
Kuenen MP, et al. (2013) Contrast-ultrasound dispersion imaging for prostate cancer localization by improved spatiotemporal similarity analysis. Ultrasound Med Biol 39(9):1631–1641PubMedCrossRef
102.
Eckersley RJ, et al. (2002) Quantitative microbubble enhanced transrectal ultrasound as a tool for monitoring hormonal treatment of prostate carcinoma. Prostate 51(4):256–267PubMedCrossRef
103.
Ahmad S, et al. (2013) Transrectal quantitative shear wave elastography in the detection and characterisation of prostate cancer. Surg Endosc 27(9):3280–3287PubMedCrossRef
104.
Haseman MK, Reed NL, Rosenthal SA (1996) Monoclonal antibody imaging of occult prostate cancer in patients with elevated prostate-specific antigen. Positron emission tomography and biopsy correlation. Clin Nucl Med 21(9):704–713PubMedCrossRef
105.
Barrett JA, et al. (2013) First-in-man evaluation of 2 high-affinity PSMA-avid small molecules for imaging prostate cancer. J Nucl Med 54(3):380–387PubMedCrossRef
106.
Rowe SP, et al. (2016) Comparison of prostate-specific membrane antigen-based 18F-DCFBC PET/CT to conventional imaging modalities for detection of hormone-naive and castration-resistant metastatic prostate cancer. J Nucl Med 57(1):46–53PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
107.
Maurer T, et al. (2015) Diagnostic Efficacy of Gallium-PSMA positron emission tomography compared to conventional imaging in lymph node staging of 130 consecutive patients with intermediate to high risk prostate cancer. J Urol. doi:10.​1016/​j.​juro.​2015.​12.​025 PubMed
108.
Dietlein M, et al. (2015) Comparison of [(18)F]DCFPyL and [(68)Ga]Ga-PSMA-HBED-CC for PSMA-PET imaging in patients with relapsed prostate cancer. Mol Imaging Biol 17(4):575–584PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
109.
110.
Harisinghani MG, et al. (2003) Noninvasive detection of clinically occult lymph-node metastases in prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 348(25):2491–2499PubMedCrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
A urologist’s perspective on prostate cancer imaging: past, present, and future
verfasst von
Arvin K. George
Baris Turkbey
Subin G. Valayil
Akhil Muthigi
Francesca Mertan
Michael Kongnyuy
Peter A. Pinto
Publikationsdatum
02.05.2016
Verlag
Springer US
Erschienen in
Abdominal Radiology / Ausgabe 5/2016
Print ISSN: 2366-004X
Elektronische ISSN: 2366-0058
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-016-0751-6

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 5/2016

Abdominal Radiology 5/2016 Zur Ausgabe

OriginalPaper

Rate of observation and inter-observer agreement for LI-RADS major features at CT and MRI in 184 pathology proven hepatocellular carcinomas

OriginalPaper

Evaluation of the impact of computed high b-value diffusion-weighted imaging on prostate cancer detection

Classics in Abdominal Imaging

Inverted V sign

OriginalPaper

Optimal visualization of focal nodular hyperplasia: quantitative and qualitative evaluation of single and multiphasic arterial phase acquisition at 1.5 T MR imaging

Invited Article

Targeted prostate biopsy and MR-guided therapy for prostate cancer

OriginalPaper

Positron emission tomography in imaging evaluation of staging, restaging, treatment response, and prognosis in prostate cancer

Neu im Fachgebiet Radiologie

18.04.2024 | Pädiatrische Notfallmedizin | Nachrichten

Fünf Dinge, die im Kindernotfall besser zu unterlassen sind

08.04.2024 | Andrologie | Nachrichten

Wie toxische Männlichkeit der Gesundheit von Männern schadet

29.03.2024 | Diagnostische Radiologie | Nachrichten

Studie bestätigt Potenzial von KI in der Radiologie

26.03.2024 | Koronare Herzerkrankung | Nachrichten

Quantitative Angiografie könnte IVUS-Alternative darstellen
weitere anzeigen

Update Radiologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

Newsletter bestellen