The role of magnetic resonance image guided prostate biopsy in stratifying men for risk of extracapsular extension at radical prostatectomy

Journal of Urology

Volumn 194, Issue 1, 2015, Pages 105-111

  Raskolnikov, Dima ^a   George, Arvin K ^a   Rais Bahrami, Soroush ^a   Turkbey, Baris ^a   Siddiqui, M Minhaj ^a   Shakir, Nabeel A ^a   Okoro, Chinonyerem ^a   Rothwax, Jason T ^a   Walton Diaz, Annerleim ^a   Sankineni, Sandeep ^a   Su, Daniel ^a   Stamatakis, Lambros ^a   Merino, Maria J ^a   Choyke, Peter L ^a   Wood, Bradford J ^a   Pinto, Peter A ^a  

^a NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE   (United States)

Author keywords

adenocarcinoma; neoplasm staging; prognosis; prostate; risk

Indexed keywords

PROSTATE SPECIFIC ANTIGEN;

ADULT; AGED; CLINICAL EVALUATION; EXTRACAPSULAR EXTENSION; GLEASON SCORE; HIGH RISK PATIENT; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; IMAGE GUIDED BIOPSY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MULTIPARAMETRIC MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE SCANNER; POPULATION; PREDICTIVE VALUE; PREOPERATIVE CARE; PREVALENCE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE BIOPSY; PROSTATE CANCER; PROSTATECTOMY; REVIEW; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK FACTOR; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; EVALUATION STUDY; MIDDLE AGED; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PATHOLOGY; PROCEDURES; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; PROSTATE; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; TUMOR INVASION;

AGED; HUMANS; IMAGE-GUIDED BIOPSY; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NEOPLASM INVASIVENESS; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; PROSTATE; PROSTATECTOMY; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; RISK ASSESSMENT;

EID: 84940662959     PISSN: 00225347     EISSN: 15273792     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2015.01.072     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. J.O. Ung, J.P. Richie, M.H. Chen, and et al. Evolution of the presentation and pathologic and biochemical outcomes after radical prostatectomy for patients with clinically localized prostate cancer diagnosed during the PSA era Urology 60 2002 458
2. G.W. Hull, F. Rabbani, F. Abbas, and et al. Cancer control with radical prostatectomy alone in 1,000 consecutive patients J Urol 167 2002 528
3. H. Hricak, L. Wang, D.C. Wei, and 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 100 2004 2655
4. A.V. D'Amico, M. Schnall, R. Whittington, and et al. Endorectal coil magnetic resonance imaging identifies locally advanced prostate cancer in select patients with clinically localized disease Urology 51 1998 449
5. J.J. Fütterer, M.R. Engelbrecht, G.J. Jager, and et al. Prostate cancer: comparison of local staging accuracy of pelvic phased-array coil alone versus integrated endorectal-pelvic phased-array coils. Local staging accuracy of prostate cancer using endorectal coil MR imaging Eur Radiol 17 2007 1055
6. O. Ruprecht, P. Weisser, B. Bodelle, and et al. MRI of the prostate: interobserver agreement compared with histopathologic outcome after radical prostatectomy Eur J Radiol 81 2012 456
7. S. Rais-Bahrami, B. Turkbey, K.B. Grant, and et al. Role of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of prostate cancer Curr Urol Rep 15 2014 387
8. D. Raskolnikov, A.K. George, S. Rais-Bahrami, and et al. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and image-guided biopsy to detect seminal vesicle invasion by prostate cancer J Endourol 28 2014 1283
9. B. Turkbey, H. Mani, V. Shah, and et al. Multiparametric 3T prostate magnetic resonance imaging to detect cancer: histopathological correlation using prostatectomy specimens processed in customized magnetic resonance imaging based molds J Urol 186 2011 1818
10. D.M. Somford, E.H. Hamoen, J.J. Futterer, and et al. The predictive value of endorectal 3 Tesla multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging for extraprostatic extension in patients with low, intermediate and high risk prostate cancer J Urol 190 2013 1728
11. N.A. Shakir, A.K. George, M.M. Siddiqui, and et al. Identification of threshold prostate specific antigen levels to optimize the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer by magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound fusion guided biopsy J Urol 192 2014 1642
12. P.A. Pinto, P.H. Chung, A.R. Rastinehad, and 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 186 2011 1281
13. D. Raskolnikov, S. Rais-Bahrami, A.K. George, and et al. The role of image guided biopsy targeting in patients with atypical small acinar proliferation J Urol 193 2015 473
14. D. Raskolnikov, S. Rais-Bahrami, B. Turkbey, and et al. Current ability of multiparametric prostate magnetic resonance imaging and targeted biopsy to improve the detection of prostate cancer Urol Pract 1 2014 13
15. B. Turkbey, P.A. Pinto, H. Mani, and et al. Prostate cancer: value of multiparametric MR imaging at 3 T for detection-histopathologic correlation Radiology 255 2010 89
16. S. Rais-Bahrami, M.M. Siddiqui, B. Turkbey, and et al. Utility of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging suspicion levels for detecting prostate cancer J Urol 190 2013 1721
17. C.W. Hong, S. Rais-Bahrami, A. Walton-Diaz, and et al. Comparison of magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasound (MRI-US) fusion-guided prostate biopsies obtained from axial and sagittal approaches BJU Int 2014 Epub ahead of print
18. A.W. Partin, L.A. Mangold, D.M. Lamm, and et al. Contemporary update of prostate cancer staging nomograms (Partin tables) for the new millennium Urology 58 2001 843
19. M. Mullerad, H. Hricak, K. Kuroiwa, and et al. Comparison of endorectal magnetic resonance imaging, guided prostate biopsy and digital rectal examination in the preoperative anatomical localization of prostate cancer J Urol 174 2005 2158
20. A. Ouzzane, P. Puech, L. Lemaitre, and et al. Combined multiparametric MRI and targeted biopsies improve anterior prostate cancer detection, staging, and grading Urology 78 2011 1356
21. D. Sundi, O.N. Kryvenko, H.B. Carter, and et al. Pathological examination of radical prostatectomy specimens in men with very low risk disease at biopsy reveals distinct zonal distribution of cancer in black American men J Urol 191 2014 60
22. D. Volkin, B. Turkbey, A.N. Hoang, and et al. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and subsequent MRI/ultrasonography fusion-guided biopsy increase the detection of anteriorly located prostate cancers BJU Int 114 2014 E43
23. J.H. Pinthus, M. Witkos, N.E. Fleshner, and et al. Prostate cancers scored as Gleason 6 on prostate biopsy are frequently Gleason 7 tumors at radical prostatectomy: implication on outcome J Urol 176 2006 979
24. R. Walker, U. Lindner, A. Louis, and et al. Concordance between transrectal ultrasound guided biopsy results and radical prostatectomy final pathology: are we getting better at predicting final pathology? Can Urol Assoc J 8 2014 47
25. 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
26. A.R. Rastinehad, B. Turkbey, S.S. Salami, and et al. Improving detection of clinically significant prostate cancer: magnetic resonance imaging/transrectal ultrasound fusion guided prostate biopsy J Urol 191 2014 1749
27. G.A. Sonn, S. Natarajan, D.J. Margolis, and et al. Targeted biopsy in the detection of prostate cancer using an office based magnetic resonance ultrasound fusion device J Urol 189 2013 86
28. J.S. Wysock, A.B. Rosenkrantz, W.C. Huang, and et al. A prospective, blinded comparison of magnetic resonance (MR) imaging-ultrasound fusion and visual estimation in the performance of MR-targeted prostate biopsy: the PROFUS trial Eur Urol 66 2014 343
29. J.O. Barentsz, J. Richenberg, R. Clements, and et al. ESUR prostate MR guidelines 2012 Eur Radiol 22 2012 746