nach oben

World Journal of Urology

Erschienen in:

06.04.2020 | Invited Review

Review article: MRI-targeted biopsies for prostate cancer diagnosis and management

verfasst von: M. Noureldin, D. Eldred-Evans, C. C. Khoo, M. Winkler, H. Sokhi, H. Tam, H. U. Ahmed

Erschienen in: World Journal of Urology | Ausgabe 1/2021

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Purpose

Transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided biopsy has been the traditional biopsy route in the detection of prostate cancer. However, due to concern regarding overdetection of low-risk cancer and missed clinically significant cancers as well as risk of sepsis, alternative approaches have been explored. Transperineal template biopsy—sampling the gland every 5 m to 10 mm—reduces error by sampling the whole prostate but increases risk of detecting clinically insignificant cancers as well as conferring risks of side effects such as urinary retention and bleeding.

Methods

There are various targeted biopsy techniques, each with different cancer detection rates, costs and learning curves. Current research focuses on refining biopsy methodology to maximize detection of significant cancers, whilst minimising invasiveness and complications. In this article, the up-to-date research data about MRI-targeted prostate biopsy were reviewed to show its utilization in prostate cancer management and diagnosis.

Results and conclusion

Prostate multiparametric MRI has become an effective tool in the detection of significant cancers and an essential component of the prostate cancer diagnostic pathway incorporating MRI-guided biopsy decisions.

Drost FH, Osses DF, Nieboer D et al (2019) Prostate MRI, with or without MRI-targeted biopsy, and systematic biopsy for detecting prostate cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 4:CD012663PubMed

Kasivisvanathan V, Rannikko AS, Borghi M et al (2018) MRI-targeted or standard biopsy for prostate-cancer diagnosis. N Engl J Med 378:1767–1777. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1801993CrossRefPubMed

Ahmed HU, El-Shater Bosaily A, Brown LC et al (2017) Diagnostic accuracy of multi-parametric MRI and TRUS biopsy in prostate cancer (PROMIS): a paired validating confirmatory study. Lancet 389:815–822. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(16)32401-1CrossRef

van der Leest M, Cornel E, Israël B et al (2019) Head-to-head comparison of transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy versus multiparametric prostate resonance imaging with subsequent magnetic resonance-guided biopsy in biopsy-naïve men with elevated prostate-specific antigen: a large prospective mu. Eur Urol. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2018.11.023CrossRefPubMed

Moldovan PC, Van den Broeck T, Sylvester R et al (2017) What is the negative predictive value of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in excluding prostate cancer at biopsy? A systematic review and meta-analysis from the european association of urology prostate cancer guidelines panel. Eur Urol. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2017.02.026CrossRefPubMed

Kasivisvanathan V, Stabile A, Neves JB et al (2019) Magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy versus systematic biopsy in the detection of prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol 76(3):284–303CrossRef

Wegelin O, Exterkate L, van der Leest M et al (2019) The future trial: a multicenter randomised controlled trial on target biopsy techniques based on magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of prostate cancer in patients with prior negative biopsies. Eur Urol. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2018.11.040CrossRefPubMed

Simmons Lucy AM, Kanthabalan A, Arya M et al (2018) Accuracy of transperineal targeted prostate biopsies, visual estimation and image fusion in men needing repeat biopsy in the picture trial. J Urol 200:1227–1234. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2018.07.001CrossRefPubMed

Gaziev G, Wadhwa K, Barrett T et al (2016) Defining the learning curve for multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the prostate using MRI-transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS) fusion-guided transperineal prostate biopsies as a validation tool. BJU Int 117:80–86. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.12892CrossRefPubMed

10.

Exterkate L, Wegelin O, Van Melick H et al (2018) 624—The Future trial: a RCT on MRI targeted prostate biopsy. Comparison of targeted and systematic biopsy outcomes. Eur Urol Suppl 17:e896–e897. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1569-9056(18)31459-3CrossRef

11.

Siddiqui MM, Rais-Bahrami S, Turkbey B (2015) Comparison of MR/ultrasound fusion-guided biopsy with ultrasound-guided biopsy for the diagnosis of prostate cancer. JAMA 313:390–397. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2014.17942CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

12.

Hansen NL, Barrett T, Kesch C et al (2018) Multicentre evaluation of magnetic resonance imaging supported transperineal prostate biopsy in biopsy-naïve men with suspicion of prostate cancer. BJU Int 122:40–49. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.14049CrossRefPubMed

13.

Haffner J, Lemaitre L, Puech P et al (2011) Role of magnetic resonance imaging before initial biopsy: comparison of magnetic resonance imaging-targeted and systematic biopsy for significant prostate cancer detection. BJU Int 108:E171–E178. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2011.10112.xCrossRefPubMed

14.

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 20:100–109CrossRef

15.

Borghesi M, Ahmed H, Nam R et al (2017) Complications after systematic, random, and image-guided prostate biopsy. Eur Urol 71:353–365CrossRef

16.

Simsir A, Kismali E, Mammadov R et al (2010) Is it possible to predict sepsis, the most serious complication in prostate biopsy? Urol Int 84:395–399CrossRef

17.

Schoots IG, Roobol MJ, Nieboer D et al (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 68:438–450. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2014.11.037CrossRefPubMed

18.

Radtke JP, Kuru TH, Boxler S et al (2015) Comparative analysis of transperineal template saturation prostate biopsy versus magnetic resonance imaging targeted biopsy with magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion guidance. J Urol 193:87–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2014.07.098CrossRefPubMed

19.

Giganti F, Moore CM (2017) A critical comparison of techniques for MRI-targeted biopsy of the prostate. Transl Androl Urol 6(3):432CrossRef

20.

Calio B, Sidana A, Sugano D et al (2017) Changes in prostate cancer detection rate of MRI-TRUS fusion vs systematic biopsy over time: evidence of a learning curve. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 20:436CrossRef

21.

Puech P, Rouvière O, Renard-Penna R et al (2013) Prostate cancer diagnosis: multiparametric mr-targeted biopsy with cognitive and transrectal US–MR fusion guidance versus systematic biopsy—prospective multicenter study. Radiology 268:461–469. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.13121501CrossRefPubMed

22.

Lee JY, Spratt DE, Liss AL, McLaughlin PW (2016) Vessel-sparing radiation and functional anatomy-based preservation for erectile function after prostate radiotherapy. Lancet Oncol 17:e198–e208CrossRef

23.

Hamid S, Donaldson IA, Hu Y et al (2018) The smart target biopsy trial: a prospective, within-person randomised, blinded trial comparing the accuracy of visual-registration and magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound image-fusion targeted biopsies for prostate cancer risk stratification. Eur Urol. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2018.08.007CrossRefPubMed

24.

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 naïve men with elevated prostate specific antigen. J Urol 192:1374–1379CrossRef

25.

Venderink W, van der Leest M, van Luijtelaar A et al (2017) Retrospective comparison of direct in-bore magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-guided biopsy and fusion-guided biopsy in patients with MRI lesions which are likely or highly likely to be clinically significant prostate cancer. World J Urol 35:1849–1855CrossRef

26.

Johnson DC, Raman SS, Mirak SA et al (2018) Detection of individual prostate cancer foci via multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging. Eur Urol. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2018.11.031CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

27.

Schoots IG, Osses DF, Drost F-JH et al (2018) Reduction of MRI-targeted biopsies in men with low-risk prostate cancer on active surveillance by stratifying to PI-RADS and PSA-density, with different thresholds for significant disease. Transl Androl Urol 7:132CrossRef

28.

Chang DT, Challacombe B, Lawrentschuk N (2013) Transperineal biopsy of the prostate—is this the future? Nat Rev Urol 10(12):690–702CrossRef

29.

Lian H, Zhuang J, Wang W et al (2017) Assessment of free-hand transperineal targeted prostate biopsy using multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging-transrectal ultrasound fusion in Chinese men with prior negative biopsy and elevated prostate-specific antigen. BMC Urol 17:52. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12894-017-0241-3CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

30.

Diaz AW, Shakir NA, George AK et al (2015) Use of serial multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in the management of patients with prostate cancer on active surveillance. In: Urologic oncology: seminars and original investigations, vol 33, no 5. Elsevier, p 202-e1

31.

Hamoen EHJ, Hoeks CMA, Somford DM et al (2019) Value of Serial multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and magnetic resonance imaging–guided biopsies in men with low-risk prostate cancer on active surveillance after 1 year follow-up. Eur Urol Focus 5:407–415CrossRef

32.

Tonttila PP, Kuisma M, Pääkkö E et al (2018) Lesion size on prostate magnetic resonance imaging predicts adverse radical prostatectomy pathology. Scand J Urol 52:111–115CrossRef

33.

Rud E, Baco E, Lien D et al (2014) Detection of radiorecurrent prostate cancer using diffusion-weighted imaging and targeted biopsies. Am J Roentgenol. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.12.10483CrossRef

34.

Donaldson IA, Alonzi R, Barratt D et al (2015) Focal therapy: patients, interventions, and outcomes—a report from a consensus meeting. Eur Urol 67:771–777CrossRef

35.

Perez-Reggeti JI, Sanchez-Salas R, Sivaraman A et al (2016) High intensity focused ultrasound with Focal-One® device: prostate-specific antigen impact and morbidity evaluation during the initial experience. Actas Urol Esp 40:608–614CrossRef

Titel: Review article: MRI-targeted biopsies for prostate cancer diagnosis and management
verfasst von: M. Noureldin
D. Eldred-Evans
C. C. Khoo
M. Winkler
H. Sokhi
H. Tam
H. U. Ahmed
Publikationsdatum: 06.04.2020
Verlag: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in: World Journal of Urology / Ausgabe 1/2021
Print ISSN: 0724-4983
Elektronische ISSN: 1433-8726
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-020-03182-3

Comment on “Deep learning computer vision algorithm for detecting kidney stone composition”

Letter to the Editor

Classification of the renal papillary abnormalities by flexible ureteroscopy: evaluation of the 2016 version and update

Open Access
Original Article

Quality management in (prostate) cancer care: what do European cancer control plans tell us?

Topic Paper

The impact of nephrostomy drainage prior to mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy in patients with ESBL-positive Escherichia coli

Original Article

Evaluation of flexible ureteroscope with an omni-directional bending tip, using a JOYSTICK unit (URF-Y0016): an ex-vivo study

Original Article

Predictive factors of urinary incontinence after holmium laser enucleation of the prostate: a multicentric evaluation

Original Article

Neu im Fachgebiet Urologie

Weniger PSA-Screening, mehr fortgeschrittene Tumoren

20.03.2025
Prostatakarzinom
Nachrichten

Eine Empfehlung gegen das Prostatakrebs-Screening, die mehrere Jahre in den Leitlinien des Royal Australasian College of General Practitioners gegeben wurde, hat sich nicht nur auf die Rate von PSA-Tests negativ ausgewirkt.

Testosterontherapie bei Klinefelter-Syndrom senkt Sterblichkeit

19.03.2025
Testosteron-Ersatztherapie
Nachrichten

Das Klinefelter-Syndrom bleibt bei vielen Männern unerkannt – und selbst nach einer Diagnose erhalten Betroffene oft keine Testosteronersatztherapie. Eine dänische Studie zeigt jedoch, dass eine solche Behandlung die Mortalität um nahezu 50% senken kann.

Mehr Nierenkrebs bei regelmäßiger Einnahme von NSAR?

18.03.2025
Nicht-Opioid-Analgetika
Nachrichten

In der Allgemeinbevölkerung ist die wiederholte Verordnung von nichtsteroidalen Antirheumatika (NSAR) mit einem leicht erhöhten Nierenkrebsrisiko assoziiert. Dieses Ergebnis einer schwedischen Registerstudie ist allerdings mit einigen Fragezeichen zu versehen.

Blick aufs Sperma statt in die Glaskugel

13.03.2025
Andrologie
Nachrichten

„Zeig mir Dein Sperma, und ich sag Dir, wie alt Du wirst“ – mit diesem Spruch können Urologinnen und Urologen nun ihre Patienten überraschen. Wer es auf über 120 Millionen motile Spermien im Ejakulat bringt, darf sich auf ein hohes Alter freuen, unter fünf Millionen sieht es schon anders aus.

Update Urologie

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

Newsletter bestellen

Springer Medizin

Review article: MRI-targeted biopsies for prostate cancer diagnosis and management