Skip to main content
Erschienen in: European Radiology 11/2016

26.02.2016 | Urogenital

Targeted MRI-guided prostate biopsy: are two biopsy cores per MRI-lesion required?

verfasst von: L. Schimmöller, M. Quentin, D. Blondin, F. Dietzel, A. Hiester, C. Schleich, C. Thomas, R. Rabenalt, H. E. Gabbert, P. Albers, G. Antoch, C. Arsov

Erschienen in: European Radiology | Ausgabe 11/2016

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Purpose

This study evaluates the feasibility of performing less than two core biopsies per MRI-lesion when performing targeted MR-guided in-bore prostate biopsy.

Methods

Retrospectively evaluated were 1545 biopsy cores of 774 intraprostatic lesions (two cores per lesion) in 290 patients (66 ± 7.8 years; median PSA 8.2 ng/ml) regarding prostate cancer (PCa) detection, Gleason score, and tumor infiltration of the first (FBC) compared to the second biopsy core (SBC). Biopsies were acquired under in-bore MR-guidance.

Results

For the biopsy cores, 491 were PCa positive, 239 of 774 (31 %) were FBC and 252 of 771 (33 %) were SBC (p = 0.4). Patient PCa detection rate based on the FBC vs. SBC were 46 % vs. 48 % (p = 0.6). For clinically significant PCa (Gleason score ≥4 + 3 = 7) the detection rate was 18 % for both, FBC and SBC (p = 0.9). Six hundred and eighty-seven SBC (89 %) showed no histologic difference. On the lesion level, 40 SBC detected PCa with negative FBC (7.5 %). Twenty SBC showed a Gleason upgrade from 3 + 3 = 6 to ≥3 + 4 = 7 (2.6 %) and 4 to ≥4 + 3 = 7 (0.5 %).

Conclusion

The benefit of a second targeted biopsy core per suspicious MRI-lesion is likely minor, especially regarding PCa detection rate and significant Gleason upgrading. Therefore, a further reduction of biopsy cores is reasonable when performing a targeted MR-guided in-bore prostate biopsy.

Key Points

Higher PI-RADS overall score (IV-V) correlated well with PCa detection rate
In more than 80 % SBC was concordant regarding overall PCa detection
In almost 90 % there was no Gleason upgrading by the SBC
Only 2/54 (3.7 %) csPCa was missed when the SBC was omitted
For IB-GB a further reduction of biopsy cores is reasonable
Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat Valerio M, Donaldson I, Emberton M, Ehdaie B, Hadaschik BA, Marks LS et al (2015) Detection of clinically significant prostate cancer using magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion targeted biopsy: a systematic review. Eur Urol 68:8–19CrossRefPubMed Valerio M, Donaldson I, Emberton M, Ehdaie B, Hadaschik BA, Marks LS et al (2015) Detection of clinically significant prostate cancer using magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion targeted biopsy: a systematic review. Eur Urol 68:8–19CrossRefPubMed
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Schoots IG, Petrides N, Giganti F, Bokhorst LP, Rannikko A, Klotz L et al (2015) Magnetic resonance imaging in active surveillance of prostate cancer: a systematic review. Eur Urol 67:627–636CrossRefPubMed Schoots IG, Petrides N, Giganti F, Bokhorst LP, Rannikko A, Klotz L et al (2015) Magnetic resonance imaging in active surveillance of prostate cancer: a systematic review. Eur Urol 67:627–636CrossRefPubMed
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Scattoni V, Maccagnano C, Capitanio U, Gallina A, Briganti A, Montorsi F (2014) Random biopsy: when, how many and where to take the cores? World J Urol 32:859–869CrossRefPubMed Scattoni V, Maccagnano C, Capitanio U, Gallina A, Briganti A, Montorsi F (2014) Random biopsy: when, how many and where to take the cores? World J Urol 32:859–869CrossRefPubMed
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Salami SS, Ben-Levi E, Yaskiv O, Ryniker L, Turkbey B, Kavoussi LR et al (2015) In patients with a previous negative prostate biopsy and a suspicious lesion on magnetic resonance imaging, is a 12-core biopsy still necessary in addition to a targeted biopsy? BJU Int 115:562–570CrossRefPubMed Salami SS, Ben-Levi E, Yaskiv O, Ryniker L, Turkbey B, Kavoussi LR et al (2015) In patients with a previous negative prostate biopsy and a suspicious lesion on magnetic resonance imaging, is a 12-core biopsy still necessary in addition to a targeted biopsy? BJU Int 115:562–570CrossRefPubMed
5.
Zurück zum Zitat van Hove A, Savoie PH, Maurin C, Brunelle S, Gravis G, Salem N et al (2014) Comparison of image-guided targeted biopsies versus systematic randomized biopsies in the detection of prostate cancer: a systematic literature review of well-designed studies. World J Urol 32:847–858CrossRefPubMed van Hove A, Savoie PH, Maurin C, Brunelle S, Gravis G, Salem N et al (2014) Comparison of image-guided targeted biopsies versus systematic randomized biopsies in the detection of prostate cancer: a systematic literature review of well-designed studies. World J Urol 32:847–858CrossRefPubMed
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Baco E, Rud E, Eri LM, Moen G, Vlatkovic L, Svindland A et al (2015) 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 69:149–156CrossRefPubMed Baco E, Rud E, Eri LM, Moen G, Vlatkovic L, Svindland A et al (2015) 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 69:149–156CrossRefPubMed
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Arsov C, Rabenalt R, Blondin D, Quentin M, Hiester A, Godehardt E 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 68:713–720CrossRefPubMed Arsov C, Rabenalt R, Blondin D, Quentin M, Hiester A, Godehardt E 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 68:713–720CrossRefPubMed
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Siddiqui MM, Rais-Bahrami S, Truong H, Stamatakis L, Vourganti S, Nix J et al (2013) Magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound-fusion biopsy significantly upgrades prostate cancer versus systematic 12-core transrectal ultrasound biopsy. Eur Urol 64:713–719CrossRefPubMed Siddiqui MM, Rais-Bahrami S, Truong H, Stamatakis L, Vourganti S, Nix J et al (2013) Magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound-fusion biopsy significantly upgrades prostate cancer versus systematic 12-core transrectal ultrasound biopsy. Eur Urol 64:713–719CrossRefPubMed
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Arsov C, Rabenalt R, Quentin M, Hiester A, Blondin D, Albers P et al (2015) Comparison of patient comfort between MR-guided in-bore and MRI/ultrasound fusion-guided prostate biopsies within a prospective randomized trial. World J Urol 34:215–220CrossRefPubMed Arsov C, Rabenalt R, Quentin M, Hiester A, Blondin D, Albers P et al (2015) Comparison of patient comfort between MR-guided in-bore and MRI/ultrasound fusion-guided prostate biopsies within a prospective randomized trial. World J Urol 34:215–220CrossRefPubMed
10.
Zurück zum Zitat Zackrisson B, Aus G, Bergdahl S, Lilja H, Lodding P, Pihl CG et al (2004) The risk of finding focal cancer (less than 3 mm) remains high on re-biopsy of patients with persistently increased prostate specific antigen but the clinical significance is questionable. J Urol 171:1500–1503CrossRefPubMed Zackrisson B, Aus G, Bergdahl S, Lilja H, Lodding P, Pihl CG et al (2004) The risk of finding focal cancer (less than 3 mm) remains high on re-biopsy of patients with persistently increased prostate specific antigen but the clinical significance is questionable. J Urol 171:1500–1503CrossRefPubMed
11.
Zurück zum Zitat Nam RK, Saskin R, Lee Y, Liu Y, Law C, Klotz LH et al (2010) Increasing hospital admission rates for urological complications after transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy. J Urol 183:963–968CrossRefPubMed Nam RK, Saskin R, Lee Y, Liu Y, Law C, Klotz LH et al (2010) Increasing hospital admission rates for urological complications after transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy. J Urol 183:963–968CrossRefPubMed
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Quentin M, Blondin D, Arsov C, Schimmöller L, Hiester A, Godehardt E et al (2014) Prospective evaluation of magnetic resonance imaging guided in bore prostate biopsy versus systematic transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy in biopsy naïve men with elevated prostate specific antigen. J Urol 192:1374–1379CrossRefPubMed Quentin M, Blondin D, Arsov C, Schimmöller L, Hiester A, Godehardt E et al (2014) Prospective evaluation of magnetic resonance imaging guided in bore prostate biopsy versus systematic transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy in biopsy naïve men with elevated prostate specific antigen. J Urol 192:1374–1379CrossRefPubMed
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Dickinson L, Ahmed HU, Allen C, Barentsz JO, Carey B, Futterer JJ et al (2011) Magnetic resonance imaging for the detection, localization and characterisation of prostate cancer: recommendations from a European consensus meeting. Eur Urol 59:477–494CrossRefPubMed Dickinson L, Ahmed HU, Allen C, Barentsz JO, Carey B, Futterer JJ et al (2011) Magnetic resonance imaging for the detection, localization and characterisation of prostate cancer: recommendations from a European consensus meeting. Eur Urol 59:477–494CrossRefPubMed
14.
15.
Zurück zum Zitat Dickinson L, Ahmed HU, Allen C, Barentsz JO, Carey B, Futterer JJ et al (2013) Scoring systems used for the interpretation and reporting of multiparametric MRI for prostate cancer detection, localization, and characterization: could standardization lead to improved utilization of imaging within the diagnostic pathway? J Magn Reson Imaging 37:48–58CrossRefPubMed Dickinson L, Ahmed HU, Allen C, Barentsz JO, Carey B, Futterer JJ et al (2013) Scoring systems used for the interpretation and reporting of multiparametric MRI for prostate cancer detection, localization, and characterization: could standardization lead to improved utilization of imaging within the diagnostic pathway? J Magn Reson Imaging 37:48–58CrossRefPubMed
16.
Zurück zum Zitat Schimmöller L, Quentin M, Arsov C, Hiester A, Buchbender C, Rabenalt R et al (2014) MR-sequences for prostate cancer diagnostics: validation based on the PI-RADS scoring system and targeted MR-guided in-bore biopsy. Eur Radiol 24:2582–2589CrossRefPubMed Schimmöller L, Quentin M, Arsov C, Hiester A, Buchbender C, Rabenalt R et al (2014) MR-sequences for prostate cancer diagnostics: validation based on the PI-RADS scoring system and targeted MR-guided in-bore biopsy. Eur Radiol 24:2582–2589CrossRefPubMed
17.
Zurück zum Zitat Röthke M, Blondin D, Schlemmer HP, Franiel T (2013) PI-RADS classification: structured reporting for MRI of the prostate. Röfo 185:253–261PubMed Röthke M, Blondin D, Schlemmer HP, Franiel T (2013) PI-RADS classification: structured reporting for MRI of the prostate. Röfo 185:253–261PubMed
18.
Zurück zum Zitat Schimmöller L, Quentin M, Arsov C, Hiester A, Kröpil P, Rabenalt R et al (2014) Predictive power of the ESUR scoring system for prostate cancer diagnosis verified with targeted MR-guided in-bore biopsy. Eur J Radiol 83:2103–2108CrossRefPubMed Schimmöller L, Quentin M, Arsov C, Hiester A, Kröpil P, Rabenalt R et al (2014) Predictive power of the ESUR scoring system for prostate cancer diagnosis verified with targeted MR-guided in-bore biopsy. Eur J Radiol 83:2103–2108CrossRefPubMed
19.
Zurück zum Zitat Heidenreich A, Bastian PJ, Bellmunt J, Bolla M, Joniau S, van der Kwast T et al (2014) EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. Part 1: screening, diagnosis, and local treatment with curative intent-update 2013. Eur Urol 65:124–137CrossRefPubMed Heidenreich A, Bastian PJ, Bellmunt J, Bolla M, Joniau S, van der Kwast T et al (2014) EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. Part 1: screening, diagnosis, and local treatment with curative intent-update 2013. Eur Urol 65:124–137CrossRefPubMed
20.
Zurück zum Zitat Nelson AW, Harvey RC, Parker RA, Kastner C, Doble A, Gnanapragasam VJ (2013) Repeat prostate biopsy strategies after initial negative biopsy: meta-regression comparing cancer detection of transperineal, transrectal saturation and MRI guided biopsy. PLoS One 8:e57480CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Nelson AW, Harvey RC, Parker RA, Kastner C, Doble A, Gnanapragasam VJ (2013) Repeat prostate biopsy strategies after initial negative biopsy: meta-regression comparing cancer detection of transperineal, transrectal saturation and MRI guided biopsy. PLoS One 8:e57480CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
21.
Zurück zum Zitat Simon J, Kuefer R, Bartsch G Jr, Volkmer BG, Hautmann RE, Gottfried HW (2008) Intensifying the saturation biopsy technique for detecting prostate cancer after previous negative biopsies: a step in the wrong direction. BJU Int 102:459–462CrossRefPubMed Simon J, Kuefer R, Bartsch G Jr, Volkmer BG, Hautmann RE, Gottfried HW (2008) Intensifying the saturation biopsy technique for detecting prostate cancer after previous negative biopsies: a step in the wrong direction. BJU Int 102:459–462CrossRefPubMed
22.
Zurück zum Zitat Schröder FH, Hugosson J, Roobol MJ, Tammela TL, Ciatto S, Nelen V et al (2009) Screening and prostate-cancer mortality in a randomized European study. N Engl J Med 360:1320–1328CrossRefPubMed Schröder FH, Hugosson J, Roobol MJ, Tammela TL, Ciatto S, Nelen V et al (2009) Screening and prostate-cancer mortality in a randomized European study. N Engl J Med 360:1320–1328CrossRefPubMed
23.
Zurück zum Zitat Siddiqui MM, Rais-Bahrami S, Turkbey B, George AK, Rothwax J, Shakir N et al (2015) Comparison of MR/ultrasound fusion-guided biopsy with ultrasound-guided biopsy for the diagnosis of prostate cancer. JAMA 313:390–397CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Siddiqui MM, Rais-Bahrami S, Turkbey B, George AK, Rothwax J, Shakir N et al (2015) Comparison of MR/ultrasound fusion-guided biopsy with ultrasound-guided biopsy for the diagnosis of prostate cancer. JAMA 313:390–397CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
24.
Zurück zum Zitat Schimmöller L, Blondin D, Arsov C, Rabenalt R, Albers P, Antoch G et al (2016) MR-guided in-bore biopsy: differences between prostate cancer detection and localization within primary and secondary biopsy settings. AJR 206:92–99CrossRefPubMed Schimmöller L, Blondin D, Arsov C, Rabenalt R, Albers P, Antoch G et al (2016) MR-guided in-bore biopsy: differences between prostate cancer detection and localization within primary and secondary biopsy settings. AJR 206:92–99CrossRefPubMed
25.
Zurück zum Zitat Fütterer JJ, Briganti A, De Visschere P, Emberton M, Giannarini G, Kirkham A et al (2015) Can clinically significant prostate cancer be detected with multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging? A systematic review of the literature. Eur Urol 68:1045–1053CrossRefPubMed Fütterer JJ, Briganti A, De Visschere P, Emberton M, Giannarini G, Kirkham A et al (2015) Can clinically significant prostate cancer be detected with multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging? A systematic review of the literature. Eur Urol 68:1045–1053CrossRefPubMed
26.
Zurück zum Zitat Bjurlin MA, Meng X, Le Nobin J, Wysock JS, Lepor H, Rosenkrantz AB et al (2014) Optimization of prostate biopsy: the role of magnetic resonance imaging targeted biopsy in detection, localization and risk assessment. J Urol 192:648–658CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Bjurlin MA, Meng X, Le Nobin J, Wysock JS, Lepor H, Rosenkrantz AB et al (2014) Optimization of prostate biopsy: the role of magnetic resonance imaging targeted biopsy in detection, localization and risk assessment. J Urol 192:648–658CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
27.
Zurück zum Zitat Arsov C, Becker N, Rabenalt R, Hiester A, Quentin M, Dietzel F et al (2015) The use of targeted MR-guided prostate biopsy reduces the risk of Gleason upgrading on radical prostatectomy. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 141:2061–2068CrossRefPubMed Arsov C, Becker N, Rabenalt R, Hiester A, Quentin M, Dietzel F et al (2015) The use of targeted MR-guided prostate biopsy reduces the risk of Gleason upgrading on radical prostatectomy. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 141:2061–2068CrossRefPubMed
28.
Zurück zum Zitat Le JD, Stephenson S, Brugger M, Lu DY, Lieu P, Sonn GA et al (2014) Magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion biopsy for prediction of final prostate pathology. J Urol 192:1367–1373CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Le JD, Stephenson S, Brugger M, Lu DY, Lieu P, Sonn GA et al (2014) Magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion biopsy for prediction of final prostate pathology. J Urol 192:1367–1373CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Metadaten
Titel
Targeted MRI-guided prostate biopsy: are two biopsy cores per MRI-lesion required?
verfasst von
L. Schimmöller
M. Quentin
D. Blondin
F. Dietzel
A. Hiester
C. Schleich
C. Thomas
R. Rabenalt
H. E. Gabbert
P. Albers
G. Antoch
C. Arsov
Publikationsdatum
26.02.2016
Verlag
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in
European Radiology / Ausgabe 11/2016
Print ISSN: 0938-7994
Elektronische ISSN: 1432-1084
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-016-4266-x

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 11/2016

European Radiology 11/2016 Zur Ausgabe

Update Radiologie

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