Added Value of Multiparametric Ultrasonography in Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Ultrasonography Fusion-guided Biopsy of the Prostate in Patients with Suspicion for Prostate Cancer

Urology

Volumn 86, Issue 1, 2015, Pages 108-114

  Maxeiner, Andreas ^a   Stephan, Carsten ^a,b   Durmus, Tahir ^a   Slowinski, Torsten ^a   Cash, Hannes ^a   Fischer, Thomas ^a  

^a CHARITÉ UNIVERSITÄTSMEDIZIN BERLIN   (Germany)

^b Berlin Institute for Urologic Research   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ECHO CONTRAST MEDIUM; PROSTATE SPECIFIC ANTIGEN;

AGED; ARTICLE; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER HORMONE THERAPY; CANCER RADIOTHERAPY; CANCER SURGERY; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC TEST ACCURACY STUDY; ELASTOGRAPHY; GLEASON SCORE; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; IMAGE GUIDED BIOPSY; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING ULTRASOUND FUSION GUIDED PROSTATE BIOPSY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MULTIMODALITY CANCER THERAPY; MULTIPARAMETRIC MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE SCANNER; PREDICTIVE VALUE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; PROSTATE BIOPSY; PROSTATE CANCER; PROSTATECTOMY; REAL TIME ECHOGRAPHY; REAL TIME ULTRASOUND SCANNER; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TRANSRECTAL ULTRASONOGRAPHY; TRANSRECTAL ULTRASONOGRAPHY GUIDED PROSTATE BIOPSY; CANCER GRADING; DIFFERENTIAL DIAGNOSIS; ECHOGRAPHY; ENDOSCOPIC ECHOGRAPHY; INTERVENTIONAL MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PATHOLOGY; PROCEDURES; PROSTATE; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; REPRODUCIBILITY; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY;

AGED; DIAGNOSIS, DIFFERENTIAL; ENDOSONOGRAPHY; HUMANS; IMAGE-GUIDED BIOPSY; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING, INTERVENTIONAL; MALE; NEOPLASM GRADING; PROSTATE; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES;

EID: 84937427648     PISSN: 00904295     EISSN: 15279995     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2015.01.055     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. R. Siegel, J. Ma, Z. Zou, and A. Jemal Cancer statistics, 2014 CA Cancer J Clin 64 2014 9 29
2. T. Durmus, A. Baur, and B. Hamm Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in the detection of prostate cancer Rofo 186 2014 238 246
3. M.C. Roethke, T.H. Kuru, S. Schultze, and et al. Evaluation of the ESUR PI-RADS scoring system for multiparametric MRI of the prostate with targeted MR/TRUS fusion-guided biopsy at 3.0 Tesla Eur Radiol 24 2014 344 352
4. A.B. Rosenkrantz, S. Kim, R.P. Lim, and et al. Prostate cancer localization using multiparametric MR imaging: comparison of prostate imaging reporting and data system (PI-RADS) and Likert scales Radiology 269 2013 482 492
5. J.O. Barentsz, J. Richenberg, R. Clements, and et al. ESUR prostate MR guidelines 2012 Eur Radiol 22 2012 746 757
6. G. Draisma, R. Etzioni, A. Tsodikov, and et al. Lead time and overdiagnosis in prostate-specific antigen screening: importance of methods and context J Natl Cancer Inst 101 2009 374 383
7. P. Puech, O. Rouviere, R. Renard-Penna, and et al. Prostate cancer diagnosis: multiparametric MR-targeted biopsy with cognitive and transrectal US-MR fusion guidance versus systematic biopsy - prospective multicenter study Radiology 268 2013 461 469
8. C.M. Moore, N.L. Robertson, N. Arsanious, and et al. Image-guided prostate biopsy using magnetic resonance imaging-derived targets: a systematic review Eur Urol 63 2013 125 140
9. E.J. Halpern, and S.E. Strup Using gray-scale and color and power Doppler sonography to detect prostatic cancer AJR Am J Roentgenol 174 2000 623 627
10. K. Konig, U. Scheipers, A. Pesavento, and et al. Initial experiences with real-time elastography guided biopsies of the prostate J Urol 174 2005 115 117
11. E.J. Halpern, L. Verkh, F. Forsberg, and et al. Initial experience with contrast-enhanced sonography of the prostate AJR Am J Roentgenol 174 2000 1575 1580
12. G.A. Sonn, E. Chang, S. Natarajan, and et al. Value of targeted prostate biopsy using magnetic resonance-ultrasound fusion in men with prior negative biopsy and elevated prostate-specific antigen Eur Urol 65 2013 809 815
13. M. Baumann, P. Mozer, V. Daanen, and J. Troccaz Prostate biopsy tracking with deformation estimation Med Image Anal 16 2012 562 576
14. T. Durmus, C. Stephan, M. Grigoryev, and et al. [Detection of prostate cancer by real-time MR/ultrasound fusion-guided biopsy: 3T MRI and state of the art sonography] Rofo 185 2013 428 433
15. C.M. Moore, V. Kasivisvanathan, S. Eggener, and et al. Standards of reporting for MRI-targeted biopsy studies (START) of the prostate: recommendations from an International Working Group Eur Urol 64 2013 544 552
16. M.M. Siddiqui, S. Rais-Bahrami, H. Truong, and et al. Magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound-fusion biopsy significantly upgrades prostate cancer versus systematic 12-core transrectal ultrasound biopsy Eur Urol 64 2013 713 719
17. S. Vourganti, A. Rastinehad, N.K. Yerram, and et al. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasound fusion biopsy detect prostate cancer in patients with prior negative transrectal ultrasound biopsies J Urol 188 2012 2152 2157
18. C.M. Hoeks, M.G. Schouten, J.G. Bomers, and et al. Three-Tesla magnetic resonance-guided prostate biopsy in men with increased prostate-specific antigen and repeated, negative, random, systematic, transrectal ultrasound biopsies: detection of clinically significant prostate cancers Eur Urol 62 2013 902 909
19. A. Heidenreich, P.J. Bastian, J. Bellmunt, and et al. EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. Part 1: screening, diagnosis, and local treatment with curative intent-update 2013 Eur Urol 65 2014 124 137
20. O. Ukimura, J.A. Coleman, A. de la Taille, and et al. Contemporary role of systematic prostate biopsies: indications, techniques, and implications for patient care Eur Urol 63 2013 214 230
21. M.R. Pokorny, M. de Rooij, E. Duncan, and et al. Prospective study of diagnostic accuracy comparing prostate cancer detection by transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy versus magnetic resonance (MR) imaging with subsequent MR-guided biopsy in men without previous prostate biopsies Eur Urol 66 2014 22 29
22. T. Hambrock, C. Hoeks, C. Hulsbergen-van de Kaa, and et al. Prospective assessment of prostate cancer aggressiveness using 3-T diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging-guided biopsies versus a systematic 10-core transrectal ultrasound prostate biopsy cohort Eur Urol 61 2012 177 184
23. M. Han, P.B. Snow, J.I. Epstein, and et al. A neural network predicts progression for men with Gleason score 3+4 versus 4+3 tumors after radical prostatectomy Urology 56 2000 994 999
24. N. Pokala, J.J. Trulson, and M. Islam Long-term outcome following radical prostatectomy for Gleason 8-10 prostatic adenocarcinoma World J Urol 32 2014 1385 1392
25. J.V. Hegde, M.H. Chen, R.V. Mulkern, and et al. Preoperative 3-Tesla multiparametric endorectal magnetic resonance imaging findings and the odds of upgrading and upstaging at radical prostatectomy in men with clinically localized prostate cancer Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 85 2013 e101 107
26. A. Briganti, A. Larcher, F. Abdollah, and et al. Updated nomogram predicting lymph node invasion in patients with prostate cancer undergoing extended pelvic lymph node dissection: the essential importance of percentage of positive cores Eur Urol 61 2012 480 487
27. E.H. Hamoen, M. de Rooij, J.A. Witjes, and et al. Use of the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) for prostate cancer detection with multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging: A diagnostic meta-analysis Eur Urol 67 2015 1112 1121
28. R. Mohan, H. Beydoun, M.L. Barnes-Ely, and et al. Patients' survival expectations before localized prostate cancer treatment by treatment status J Am Board Fam Med 22 2009 247 256
29. T.J. Wilt, M.K. Brawer, K.M. Jones, and et al. Radical prostatectomy versus observation for localized prostate cancer N Engl J Med 367 2012 203 213
30. M. Bul, X. Zhu, R. Valdagni, and et al. Active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer worldwide: the PRIAS study Eur Urol 63 2013 597 603