Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Uro-News 1/2019

01.01.2019 | Fortbildung

Biopsiemethode der Wahl

Standardmäßige systematische Biopsie bei MRT-fusionierter Targetbiopsie?

verfasst von: PD Dr. med. Dr. rer. pol. Philipp Mandel, Felix Preisser, Lena Theißen, Boris Bodelle, Felix Chun

Erschienen in: Uro-News | Ausgabe 1/2019

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Zusammenfassung

Bei Patienten ohne durchgeführte oder mit negativer multiparametrischer Magnetresonanztomografie der Prostata ist die randomisierte Prostatabiopsie die Diagnostik der ersten Wahl. Mit Nachweis einer Targetläsion PI-RADS ≥3 stellt sich jedoch die Frage, ob standardmäßig eine systematische Biopsie im Rahmen der MRT-fusionierten Targetbiopsie durchgeführt werden soll.
Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat Maxeiner A. et al. Primary magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasonography fusion- guided biopsy of the prostate. BJU International, 2018; 122: 211–8CrossRef Maxeiner A. et al. Primary magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasonography fusion- guided biopsy of the prostate. BJU International, 2018; 122: 211–8CrossRef
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Bratan F. et al. Influence of imaging and histological factors on prostate cancer detection and localisation on multiparametric MRI: a prospective study. Eur Radiol. 2013; 23: 2019–29CrossRef Bratan F. et al. Influence of imaging and histological factors on prostate cancer detection and localisation on multiparametric MRI: a prospective study. Eur Radiol. 2013; 23: 2019–29CrossRef
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Fütterer J.J. et al. Can Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer Be Detected with Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging? A Systematic Review of the Literature. Eur Urol. 2015; 68: 1045–53CrossRef Fütterer J.J. et al. Can Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer Be Detected with Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging? A Systematic Review of the Literature. Eur Urol. 2015; 68: 1045–53CrossRef
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Ahmed H.U. et al. Diagnostic accuracy of multi-parametric MRI and TRUS biopsy in prostate cancer (PROMIS): a paired validating confirmatory study. Lancet. 2017; 389: 815–822CrossRef Ahmed H.U. et al. Diagnostic accuracy of multi-parametric MRI and TRUS biopsy in prostate cancer (PROMIS): a paired validating confirmatory study. Lancet. 2017; 389: 815–822CrossRef
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Le J.D. et al. Multifocality and Prostate Cancer Detection by Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging: Correlation with Whole-mount Histopathology. Eur Urol. 2015; 67: 569–76CrossRef Le J.D. et al. Multifocality and Prostate Cancer Detection by Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging: Correlation with Whole-mount Histopathology. Eur Urol. 2015; 67: 569–76CrossRef
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Rosenkrantz A.B. et al. Interobserver Reproducibility of the PI-RADS Version 2 Lexicon: A Multicenter Study of Six Experienced Prostate Radiologists. Radiology. 2016; 280: 793–804CrossRef Rosenkrantz A.B. et al. Interobserver Reproducibility of the PI-RADS Version 2 Lexicon: A Multicenter Study of Six Experienced Prostate Radiologists. Radiology. 2016; 280: 793–804CrossRef
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Muller B.G. et al. Prostate Cancer: Interobserver Agreement and Accuracy with the Revised Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System at Multiparametric MR Imaging. Radiology. 2015; 277: 741–50CrossRef Muller B.G. et al. Prostate Cancer: Interobserver Agreement and Accuracy with the Revised Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System at Multiparametric MR Imaging. Radiology. 2015; 277: 741–50CrossRef
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Zhao C. et al. The efficiency of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) using PI-RADS Version 2 in the diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer. Clin Imaging. 2016; 40: 885–8CrossRef Zhao C. et al. The efficiency of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) using PI-RADS Version 2 in the diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer. Clin Imaging. 2016; 40: 885–8CrossRef
9.
Zurück zum Zitat van Hove A. et al. 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. 2014; 32: 847–58CrossRef van Hove A. et al. 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. 2014; 32: 847–58CrossRef
10.
Zurück zum Zitat Porpiglia F. et al. 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. 2017; 72: 282–8CrossRef Porpiglia F. et al. 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. 2017; 72: 282–8CrossRef
11.
Zurück zum Zitat Kasivisvanathan V. et al. MRI-Targeted or Standard Biopsy for Prostate-Cancer Diagnosis. N Engl J Med. 2018; 378: 1767–77CrossRef Kasivisvanathan V. et al. MRI-Targeted or Standard Biopsy for Prostate-Cancer Diagnosis. N Engl J Med. 2018; 378: 1767–77CrossRef
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Weinreb J.C. et al. PI-RADS Prostate Imaging - Reporting and Data System: 2015, Version 2. Eur Urol. 2016; 69: 16–40CrossRef Weinreb J.C. et al. PI-RADS Prostate Imaging - Reporting and Data System: 2015, Version 2. Eur Urol. 2016; 69: 16–40CrossRef
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Interdisziplinäre Leitlinie der Qualität S3 zur Früherkennung, Diagnose und Therapie der verschiedenen Stadien des Prostatakarzinoms April 2018: Leitlinienprogramm Onkologie der Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Wissenschaftlichen Medizinischen Fachgesellschaften e.V. (AWMF), Deutschen Krebsgesellschaft e.V. (DKG) und Deutschen Krebshilfe (DKH). www.awmf.org/leitlinien/ detail/ll/043-022OL.html Interdisziplinäre Leitlinie der Qualität S3 zur Früherkennung, Diagnose und Therapie der verschiedenen Stadien des Prostatakarzinoms April 2018: Leitlinienprogramm Onkologie der Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Wissenschaftlichen Medizinischen Fachgesellschaften e.V. (AWMF), Deutschen Krebsgesellschaft e.V. (DKG) und Deutschen Krebshilfe (DKH). www.​awmf.​org/​leitlinien/ detail/ll/043-022OL.html
14.
Zurück zum Zitat Mottet N. et al. EAU - ESTRO - ESUR - SIOG Guidelines on Prostate Cancer. 2018. Mottet N. et al. EAU - ESTRO - ESUR - SIOG Guidelines on Prostate Cancer. 2018.
15.
Zurück zum Zitat Baco, E. et al. 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. 2016; 69: 149–56CrossRef Baco, E. et al. 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. 2016; 69: 149–56CrossRef
16.
Zurück zum Zitat Borkowetz A. et al. Prospective comparison of transperineal magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasonography fusion biopsy and transrectal systematic biopsy in biopsy-naïve patients. BJU Int. 2018; 121: 53–60CrossRef Borkowetz A. et al. Prospective comparison of transperineal magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasonography fusion biopsy and transrectal systematic biopsy in biopsy-naïve patients. BJU Int. 2018; 121: 53–60CrossRef
17.
Zurück zum Zitat Wegelin O. et al. 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. 2017; 71: 517–31CrossRef Wegelin O. et al. 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. 2017; 71: 517–31CrossRef
18.
Zurück zum Zitat Siddiqui M. et al., Comparison of mr/ultrasound fusion-guided biopsy with ultrasound-guided biopsy for the diagnosis of prostate cancer. JAMA. 2015; 313: 390–7CrossRef Siddiqui M. et al., Comparison of mr/ultrasound fusion-guided biopsy with ultrasound-guided biopsy for the diagnosis of prostate cancer. JAMA. 2015; 313: 390–7CrossRef
19.
Zurück zum Zitat Filson C.P. et al. Prostate cancer detection with magnetic resonance-ultrasound fusion biopsy: The role of systematic and targeted biopsies. Cancer. 2016; 122: 884–92CrossRef Filson C.P. et al. Prostate cancer detection with magnetic resonance-ultrasound fusion biopsy: The role of systematic and targeted biopsies. Cancer. 2016; 122: 884–92CrossRef
20.
Zurück zum Zitat Sugano Dordaneh S.A. et al. MRI-targeted biopsy: is systematic biopsy obsolete? CJU. 2017; 24: 8876–82 Sugano Dordaneh S.A. et al. MRI-targeted biopsy: is systematic biopsy obsolete? CJU. 2017; 24: 8876–82
21.
Zurück zum Zitat Loeb S. et al. Systematic Review of Complications of Prostate Biopsy. Eur Urol. 2013; 64: 876–92CrossRef Loeb S. et al. Systematic Review of Complications of Prostate Biopsy. Eur Urol. 2013; 64: 876–92CrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
Biopsiemethode der Wahl
Standardmäßige systematische Biopsie bei MRT-fusionierter Targetbiopsie?
verfasst von
PD Dr. med. Dr. rer. pol. Philipp Mandel
Felix Preisser
Lena Theißen
Boris Bodelle
Felix Chun
Publikationsdatum
01.01.2019
Verlag
Springer Medizin
Erschienen in
Uro-News / Ausgabe 1/2019
Print ISSN: 1432-9026
Elektronische ISSN: 2196-5676
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00092-019-2118-0

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 1/2019

Uro-News 1/2019 Zur Ausgabe

Update Urologie

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