Fine-tuning robot-assisted radical prostatectomy planning with MRI

Urologic Oncology: Seminars and Original Investigations

Volumn 31, Issue 6, 2013, Pages 766-775

  Finley, David S ^a   Margolis, Daniel ^b   Raman, Steve S ^b   Ellingson, Benjamin M ^b   Natarajan, Shyam ^b   Tan, Nelly ^b   Huang, Jiaoti ^b   Reiter, Robert E ^b  

^a KAISER PERMANENTE MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACCURACY; ARTICLE; BLADDER NECK; BLADDER SPHINCTER; BLEEDING; CLINICAL DECISION MAKING; CLINICAL PRACTICE; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; DIFFUSION WEIGHTED IMAGING; DIGITAL RECTAL EXAMINATION; HUMAN; INGUINAL HERNIA; INTRAOPERATIVE PERIOD; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE SPECTROSCOPY; PATIENT COUNSELING; PELVIS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE; PROSTATE HYPERTROPHY; PROSTATE SIZE; PROSTATECTOMY; RADIOLOGIST; ROBOT ASSISTED RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SIGNAL NOISE RATIO; SURGICAL ANATOMY; TREATMENT PLANNING; TUMOR LOCALIZATION;

MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MRI; MULTIPARAMETRIC; RALP; RARP; ROBOTIC-ASSISTED RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY;

DECISION MAKING; HUMANS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MALE; NEOPLASM STAGING; PROSTATE; PROSTATECTOMY; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; ROBOTICS; SEMINAL VESICLES; SURGERY, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 84880700465     PISSN: 10781439     EISSN: 18732496     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2011.07.013     Document Type: Article

References (67)

1. Fuchsjäger M., Shukla-Dave A., Akin O., et al. Prostate cancer imaging. Acta Radiol 2008, 49: 107-120.
2. Dickinson L., Ahmed H.U., Allen C., et al. Magnetic Resonance imaging for the detection, localization, and characterization of prostate cancer: Recommendations from a European Consensus Meeting. Eur Urol 2011, 59: 477-494.
3. Sciarra A., Barentsz J., Bjartell A., et al. Advances in magnetic resonance imaging: How they are changing the management of prostate cancer. Eur Urol 2011, 59: 962-967.
4. Grimm M.O., Thomas C., Frohner M., et al. Pelvic lymphadenectomy and radical prostatectomy. Recommendations of the German S3 Guideline. Urologe A 2010, 49: 206-210.
5. Yakar D., Heijmink S.W., Hulsbergen-van de Kaa C.A., et al. Initial results of three-dimensional 1H-magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging in the localization of prostate cancer at 3 Tesla: Should we use an endorectal coil?. Invest Radiol 2011, 46: 301-306.
6. Torricelli P., Barberini A., Cinquantini F., et al. 3-T MRI with phased-array coil in local staging of prostatic cancer. Acad Radiol 2008, 15: 1118-1125.
7. Hong S.K., Kim D.S., Lee W.K., et al. Significance of post-biopsy hemorrhage observed on preoperative magnetic resonance imaging in performing robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. World J Urol 2010, 28: 721-726.
8. Colleselli D., Schilling D., Lichy M.P. Topographical sensitivity and specificity of endorectal coil magnetic resonance imaging for prostate cancer detection. Urol Int 2010, 84: 388-394.
9. Roethke M.C., Lichy M.P., Jurgschat L., et al. Tumor size dependent detection rate of endorectal MRI of prostate cancer: Histopathologic correlation with whole-mount sections in 70 patients with prostate cancer. Eur J Radiol 2010, Mar 11, [Epub ahead of print].
10. Delongchamps N.B., Rouanne M., Flam T., et al. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging for the detection and localization of prostate cancer: Combination of T2-weighted, dynamic contrast-enhanced and diffusion-weighted imaging. BJU 2010, 107: 1411-1418.
11. Hambrock T., Somford D.M., Huisman H.J., et al. Relationship between apparent diffusion coefficients at 3.0-T MR imaging and Gleason grade in peripheral zone prostate cancer. Radiology 2011, 259: 453-461.
12. Uhl M., Altehoefer C., Kontny U., et al. MRI-diffusion imaging of neuroblastomas: First results and correlation to histology. Eur Radiol 2002, 12: 2335-2338.
13. Chenevert T.L., Sundgren P.C., Ross B.D. Diffusion imaging: Insight to cell status and cytoarchitecture. Neuroimaging Clin N Am 2006, 16: 619-632.
14. Langer D.L., van der Kwast T.H., Evans A.J., et al. Prostate tissue composition and MR measurements: Investigating the relationships between ADC, T2, K(trans), v(e), and corresponding histologic features. Radiology 2010, 255: 485-494.
15. Verma S., Rajesh A., Morales H., et al. Assessment of aggressiveness of prostate cancer: Correlation of apparent diffusion coefficient with histologic grade after radical prostatectomy. AJR 2011, 196: 374-381.
16. Bostwick D.G. Gleason grading of prostate needle biopsies: Correlation with grade in 316 matched prostatectomies. Am J Surg Pathol 1994, 18: 796-803.
17. Corcoran N.M., Hong M.K., Casey R.G., et al. Upgrade in Gleason score between prostate biopsies and pathology following radical prostatectomy significantly impacts upon the risk of biochemical recurrence. BJU Int 2011, Mar 28, [Epub ahead of print].
18. Noworolski S.M., Henry R.G., Vigneron D.B., et al. Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI in normal and abnormal prostate tissues as defined by biopsy, MRI, and 3D MRSI. Magn Reson Med 2005, 53: 249-255.
19. McMahon C.J., Bloch B.N., Lenkinski R.E., et al. Dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging in the evaluation of patients with prostate cancer. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 2009, 17: 363-383.
20. Isebaert S., De Keyzer F., Haustermans K., et al. Evaluation of semi-quantitative dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI parameters for prostate cancer in correlation to whole-mount histopathology. Eur J Radiol 2011 Feb 22, [Epub ahead of print].
21. Kitajima K., Kaji Y., Fukabori Y., et al. Prostate cancer detection with 3 T MRI: Comparison of diffusion-weighted imaging and dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI in combination with T2-weighted imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging 2010, 31: 625-631.
22. Vargas H.A., Akin O., Franiel T., et al. Diffusion-weighted Endorectal MR Imaging at 3 T for Prostate Cancer: Tumor Detection and Assessment of Aggressiveness. Radiology 2011 Mar 24, [Epub ahead of print].
23. Turkbey B., Pinto P.A., Mani H., et al. Prostate cancer: Value of multiparametric MR imaging at 3 T for detection-histopathologic correlation. Radiology 2010, 255: 89-99.
24. Puech P., Potiron E., Lemaitre L., et al. Dynamic contrast-enhanced-magnetic resonance imaging evaluation of intraprostatic prostate cancer: Correlation with radical prostatectomy specimens. Urology 2009, 74: 1094-1099.
25. Kobus T., Hambrock T., Hulsbergen-van de Kaa C.A., et al. In vivo assessment of prostate cancer aggressiveness using magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging at 3 T with an endorectal coil. Eur Urol 2011, [Epub ahead of print].
26. De Visschere P.J., De Meerleer G.O., Futterer J.J., et al. Role of MRI in follow-up after focal therapy for prostate carcinoma. AJR 2010, 194: 1427-1433.
27. Scheidler J., Hricak H., Vigneron D.B., et al. Prostate cancer: Localization with three-dimensional proton MR spectroscopic imaging-clinicopathologic study. Radiol 1999, 213: 473-480.
28. Kurhanewicz J., Vigneron D.B., Hricak H., et al. Three-dimensional H-1 MR spectroscopic imaging of the in situ human prostate with high (0.24-0.7-cm3) spatial resolution. Radiology 1996, 198: 795-805.
29. Riches S.F., Payne G.S., Morgan V.A., et al. MRI in the detection of prostate cancer: Combined apparent diffusion coefficient, metabolite ratio, and vascular parameters. AJR 2009, 193: 1583-1591.
30. Klijn S., De Visschere P.J., De Meerleer G.O., et al. Comparison of qualitative and quantitative approach to prostate MR spectroscopy in peripheral zone cancer detection. Eur J Radiol 2011, [Epub ahead of print].
31. Scheenen T.W.J., Futterer J., Weiland E., et al. Discriminating cancer from noncancer tissue in the prostate by three-dimensional proton magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging. Invest Radiol 2011, 46: 25-33.
32. Riches S.F., Payne G.S., Morgan V.A., et al. MRI in the detection of prostate cancer: Combined apparent diffusion coefficient, metabolite ratio, and vascular parameters. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2009, 193: 1583-1591.
33. Zakian K.L., Sircar K., Hricak H., et al. Correlation of proton MR spectroscopic imaging with Gleason score based on step-section pathologic analysis after radical prostatectomy. Radiol 2005, 234: 804-814.
34. Rapp D.E., Orvieto M.A., Lucioni A., et al. Intra-operative prostate examination: Predictive value and effect on margin status. BJU Int 2005, 96: 1005-1008.
35. Labanaris A.P., Zugor V., Takriti S., et al. The role of conventional and functional endorectal magnetic resonance imaging in the decision of whether to preserve or resect the neurovascular bundles during radical retropubic prostatectomy. Scand J Urol Nephrol 2009, 43: 25-31.
36. Hricak H., Wang L., Wei D.C., et al. The role of preoperative endorectal magnetic resonance imaging in the decision regarding whether to preserve or resect neurovascular bundles during radical retropubic prostatectomy. Cancer 2004, 100: 2655-2663.
37. Ogura K., Maekawa S., Okubo K., et al. Dynamic endorectal magnetic resonance imaging for local staging and detection of neurovascular bundle involvement of prostate cancer: Correlation with histopathologic results. Urology 2001, 57: 721-726.
38. Lee S.E., Hong S.K., Han J.H., et al. Significance of neurovascular bundle formation observed on preoperative magnetic resonance imaging regarding postoperative erectile function after nerve-sparing radical retropubic prostatectomy. Urology 2007, 69: 510-514.
39. Margolis D, McClure T, Raman S, et al. Prostate MRI and surgical planning in robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy. Proceedings of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Genitourinary Cancers Symposium. San Francisco, CA: June 2010.
40. Eastham J.A., Kuroiwa K., Ohori M., et al. Prognostic significance of location of positive margins in radical prostatectomy specimens. Urology 2007, 70: 965-969.
41. Epstein J.I., Partin A.W., Sauvageot J., et al. Prediction of progression following radical prostatectomy: A multivariate analysis of 721 men with long-term follow-up. Am J Surg Pathol 1996, 20: 286-292.
42. Obek C., Sadek S., Lai S., et al. Positive surgical margins with radical retropubic prostatectomy: Anatomic site-specific pathologic analysis and impact on prognosis. Urology 1999, 54: 682-688.
43. Smith J.A., Chan R.C., Chang S.S., et al. A comparison of the incidence and location of positive surgical margins in robotic assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy and open retropubic radical prostatectomy. J Urol 2007, 178: 2385-2389. Discussion 2389-90.
44. Patel V.R., Shah S., Arend D. Histopathologic outcomes of robotic radical prostatectomy. Sci World J 2006, 6: 2566-2572.
45. Coelho R.F., Chauhan S., Orvieto M.A., et al. Influence of modified posterior reconstruction of the rhabdosphincter on early recovery of continence and anastomotic leakage rates after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 2011, 59: 72-80.
46. Gautam G., Rocco B., Patel V.R., et al. Posterior rhabdosphincter reconstruction during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: Critical analysis of techniques and outcomes. Urology 2010, 76: 734-741.
47. Villers A., Mcneal J.E., Freihas F.S., et al. Invasion of Denonvilliers' fascia in radical prostatectomy specimens. J Urol 1993, 149: 793-798.
48. Al-Ahmadie H.A., Tickoo S.K., Olgac S., et al. Anterior-predominant prostatic tumors: Zone of origin and pathologic outcomes at radical prostatectomy. Am J Surg Pathol 2008, 32: 229-235.
49. Lemaitre L., Puech P., Poncelet E., et al. Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI of anterior prostate cancer: Morphometric assessment and correlation with radical prostatectomy findings. Eur Radiol 2009, 19: 470-480.
50. Amsellem-Ouazana D., Younes P., Conquy S., et al. Negative prostatic biopsies in patients with a high risk of prostate cancer. Is the combination of endorectal MRI and magnetic resonance spectroscopy imaging (MRSI) a useful tool? A preliminary study. Eur Urol 2005, 47: 582-586.
51. Finley D.S., Deane L., Rodriguez E., et al. Anatomic excision of anterior prostatic fat at radical prostatectomy: Implications for pathologic upstaging. Urology 2007, 70: 1000-1003.
52. Jeong J., Choi E.Y., Kang D.I., et al. Pathologic implications of prostatic anterior fat pad. Urologic Oncol 2011 Mar 9, [Epub ahead of print].
53. Borin J.F., Skarecky D.W., Narula N., et al. Impact of urethral stump length on continence and positive surgical margins in robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy. Urology 2007, 70: 173-177.
54. Ahlering T.E., Eichel L., Edwards R.A., et al. Robotic radical prostatectomy: A technique to reduce pT2 positive margins. Urology 2004, 64: 1224-1228.
55. Park B.J., Sung D.J., Kim M.J., et al. The incidence and anatomy of accessory pudendal arteries as depicted on multidetector-row CT angiography: Clinical implications of preoperative evaluation for laparoscopic and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Korean J Radiol 2009, 10: 587-595.
56. Nehra A., Kumar R., Ramakumar S., et al. Pharmacoangiographic evidence of the presence and anatomical dominance of accessory pudendal artery(s). J Urol 2008, 179: 2317-2320.
57. Box G.N., Kaplan A.G., Rodriguez E., et al. Sacrifice of accessory pudendal arteries in normally potent men during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy does not impact potency. J Sex Med 2010, 7: 298-303.
58. Mulhall J.P., Secin F.P., Guillonneau B. Artery sparing radical prostatectomy-myth or reality?. J Urol 2008, 179: 827-831.
59. Nguyen L., Jhaveri J., Tewari A. Surgical technique to overcome anatomical shortcoming: Balancing post-prostatectomy continence outcomes of urethral sphincter lengths on preoperative magnetic resonance imaging. J Urol 2008, 179: 1907-1911.
60. Mason B.M., Hakimi A.A., Faleck D. The role of preoperative endo-rectal coil magnetic resonance imaging in predicting surgical difficulty for robotic prostatectomy. Urology 2010, 76: 1130-1135.
61. von Bodman C., Matsushita K., Matikainen M.P., et al. Do pelvic dimensions and prostate location contribute to the risk of experiencing complications after radical prostatectomy?. BJU Int 2011 Mar 28, [Epub ahead of print].
62. Mendoza P.J., Stern K.J.M., Jaffe W., et al. Pelvic anatomy on preoperative magnetic resonance imaging can predict early continence after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. J Endourol 2011, 25: 51-55.
63. Saokar A., Islam T., Jantsch M., et al. Detection of lymph nodes in pelvic malignancies with computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging. Clin Imaging 2010, 34: 361-366.
64. Finley D.S., Rodriguez E., Ahlering T.E. Combined inguinal hernia repair with prosthetic mesh during transperitoneal robot assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: A 4-year experience. J Urol 2007, 178: 1296-1299. Discussion 1299-300.
65. Marien T., Taouli B., Telegrafi S., et al. Optimizing the detection of subclinical inguinal hernias in men undergoing open radical retropubic prostatectomy. BJU Int 2010, 106: 1468-1472.
66. Angulo J.C., Romero I., Cabrera P., et al. Vesiculectomy with laparoscopic partial prostatectomy in the treatment of primary adenocarcinoma of the seminal vesicle with carcinomatous transformation of the ejaculatory duct. Actas Urol Esp 2011, 35: 304-309.
67. Marien T.P., Shapiro E., Melamed J., et al. Management of localized prostate cancer and an incidental ureteral duplication with upper pole ectopic ureter inserting into the prostatic urethra. Rev Urol 2008, 10: 297-303.