Prostate cancer diagnosis : Multiparametric mr-targeted biopsy with cognitive and transrectal us-mr fusion guidance versus systematic biopsy-prospective multicenter study

Radiology

Volumn 268, Issue 2, 2013, Pages 461-469

  Puech, Philippe ^a,c,h   Rouvière, Olivier ^a,d,f   Renard Penna, Raphaele ^a   Villers, Arnauld ^b,c   Devos, Patrick ^b,c   Colombel, Marc ^b,g   Bitker, Marc Olivier ^b   Leroy, Xavier ^b,c   Mège Lechevallier, Florence ^e   Comperat, Eva ^g   Ouzzane, Adil ^b,c   Lemaitre, Laurent ^c  

^a Departments of Radiology   (France)

^b Urology ^*  (France)

^c UNIV LILLE   (France)

^d HOSPICES CIVILS DE LYON   (France)

^e EDOUARD HERRIOT HOSPITAL   (France)

^f UNIVERSITÉ LYON 1   (France)

^g PITIÉ SALPÊTRIÈRE HOSPITAL   (France)

^h LILLE UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (France)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

PROSTATE SPECIFIC ANTIGEN;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; DIAGNOSTIC TEST ACCURACY STUDY; EXTENDED SYSTEMATIC BIOPSY; GLEASON SCORE; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; IMAGE ANALYSIS; IMAGE QUALITY; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MULTICENTER STUDY; MULTIPARAMETRIC MAGNETIC RESONANCE TARGETED BIOPSY; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; PROSTATE BIOPSY; PROSTATE CANCER; PROSTATE VOLUME; TRANSRECTAL ULTRASONOGRAPHY;

AGED; BIOPSY; CHI-SQUARE DISTRIBUTION; FRANCE; HUMANS; IMAGING, THREE-DIMENSIONAL; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; SOFTWARE; ULTRASONOGRAPHY, INTERVENTIONAL;

EID: 84880689239     PISSN: 00338419     EISSN: 15271315     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1148/radiol.13121501     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Babaian RJ, Toi A, Kamoi K, et al. A comparative analysis of sextant and an extended 11-core multisite directed biopsy strategy. J Urol 2000;163(1):152-157.
2. Presti JC Jr, O'Dowd GJ, Miller MC, Mattu R, Veltri RW. Extended peripheral zone biopsy schemes increase cancer detection rates and minimize variance in prostate specific antigen and age related cancer rates: Results of a community multi-practice study. J Urol 2003;169(1):125-129.
3. Naughton CK, Miller DC, Yan Y. Impact of transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy on quality of life: A prospective randomized trial comparing 6 versus 12 cores. J Urol 2001;165(1):100-103.
4. Eskew LA, Bare RL, McCullough DL. Systematic 5 region prostate biopsy is superior to sextant method for diagnosing carcinoma of the prostate. J Urol 1997;157(1):199-202; discussion 202-203.
5. Ouzzane A, Puech P, Lemaitre L, et al. Combined multiparametric MRI and targeted biopsies improve anterior prostate cancer detection, staging, and grading. Urology 2011;78(6): 1356-1362.
6. Haffner J, Lemaitre L, Puech P, et al. Role of magnetic resonance imaging before initial biopsy: Comparison of magnetic resonance imaging-targeted and systematic biopsy for significant prostate cancer detection. BJU Int 2011;108(8 Pt 2):E171-E178.
7. Hambrock T, Somford DM, Hoeks C, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging guided prostate biopsy in men with repeat negative biopsies and increased prostate specific antigen. J Urol 2010;183(2):520-527.
8. Moore C, Robertson N, Arsanious N, et al. Image-guided prostate biopsy using magnetic resonance imaging-derived targets: A systematic review. Eur Urol 2013;63(1):125-140.
9. Pinto PA, Chung PH, Rastinehad AR, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound fusion guided prostate biopsy improves cancer detection following transrectal ultrasound biopsy and correlates with multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging. J Urol 2011; 186(4):1281-1285.
10. Dickinson L, Ahmed HU, Allen C, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging for the detection, localisation, and characterisation of prostate cancer: Recommendations from a European consensus meeting. Eur Urol 2011;59(4):477-494.
11. Haffner J, Potiron E, Bouyé S, et al. Peripheral zone prostate cancers: Location and intraprostatic patterns of spread at histopathology. Prostate 2009;69(3):276-282.
12. Villers A, Mouton D, Rébillard X, et al. Biopsy technique and biopsy schemes for a first series of prostatic biopsies [in French]. Prog Urol 2004;14(2):144-153.
13. Barentsz JO, Richenberg J, Clements R, et al. ESUR prostate MR guidelines 2012. Eur Radiol 2012;22(4):746-757.
14. Ahmed HU, Kirkham A, Arya M, et al. Is it time to consider a role for MRI before prostate biopsy? Nat Rev Clin Oncol 2009;6(4):197-206.
15. Kumar V, Jagannathan NR, Thulkar S, Kumar R. Prebiopsy magnetic resonance spectroscopy and imaging in the diagnosis of prostate cancer. Int J Urol 2012;19(7):602-613.
16. Levy DA, Jones JS. Management of rising prostate-specific antigen after a negative biopsy. Curr Urol Rep 2011;12(3):197-202.
17. Arsov C, Quentin M, Rabenalt R, Antoch G, Albers P, Blondin D. Repeat transrectal ultrasound biopsies with additional targeted cores according to results of functional prostate MRI detects high-risk prostate cancer in patients with previous negative biopsy and increased PSA: A pilot study. Anticancer Res 2012; 32(3):1087-1092.
18. Schlemmer HP. Prostate cancer: Localizing the cancer in patients with persistent negative biopsies. Cancer Imaging 2011;11(issue A):S1. doi:10.1102/1470-7330.2011.9001. Accessed 2013.
19. Cheikh AB, Girouin N, Colombel M, et al. Evaluation of T2-weighted and dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI in localizing prostate cancer before repeat biopsy. Eur Radiol 2009; 19(3):770-778.
20. Hambrock T, Hoeks C, Hulsbergen-van de Kaa C, et al. Prospective assessment of prostate cancer aggressiveness using 3-T diffusionweighted magnetic resonance imaging-guided biopsies versus a systematic 10-core transrectal ultrasound prostate biopsy cohort. Eur Urol 2012;61(1):177-184.
21. Hadaschik BA, Kuru TH, Tulea C, et al. A novel stereotactic prostate biopsy system integrating pre-interventional magnetic resonance imaging and live ultrasound fusion. J Urol 2011; 186(6):2214-2220.
22. Miyagawa T, Ishikawa S, Kimura T, et al. Real-time virtual sonography for navigation during targeted prostate biopsy using magnetic resonance imaging data. Int J Urol 2010; 17(10):855-860.
23. Lawrentschuk N, Fleshner N. The role of magnetic resonance imaging in targeting prostate cancer in patients with previous negative biopsies and elevated prostate-specific antigen levels. BJU Int 2009;103(6):730-733.
24. Kuru TH, Tulea C, Simpfendörfer T, et al. MRI navigated stereotactic prostate biopsy: Fusion of MRI and real-time transrectal ultrasound images for perineal prostate biopsies [in German]. Urologe A 2011;51(1):50-56.
25. Singh AK, Kruecker J, Xu S, et al. Initial clinical experience with real-time transrectal ultrasonography-magnetic resonance imaging fusion-guided prostate biopsy. BJU Int 2008;101(7):841-845.
26. Ukimura O, Hirahara N, Fujihara A, et al. Technique for a hybrid system of real-time transrectal ultrasound with preoperative magnetic resonance imaging in the guidance of targeted prostate biopsy. Int J Urol 2010; 17(10):890-893.
27. Xu S, Kruecker J, Turkbey B, et al. Realtime MRI-TRUS fusion for guidance of targeted prostate biopsies. Comput Aided Surg 2008;13(5):255-264.
28. Roethke M, Anastasiadis AG, Lichy M, et al. MRI-guided prostate biopsy detects clinically significant cancer: Analysis of a cohort of 100 patients after previous negative TRUS biopsy. World J Urol 2012;30(2):213-218.