Evaluation of intersession 3D‐TRUS to 3D‐TRUS image registration for repeat prostate biopsies

Karnik, Vaishali; Fenster, Aaron; Bax, Jeffrey; Romagnoli, Cesare; Ward, Aaron D.

doi:10.1118/1.3560883

Cited by 16 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 27 publications

(23 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For those patients with suspicious lesions on MP-MRI, Fn-Bx was performed prior to Std-Bx, with 1-3 samples collected per lesion. MRI-TRUS fusion was performed using cool et al 23,24 to align the pre-biopsy 3D TRUS volume to the intra-biopsy 3D TRUS image. All MRI lesions were then mapped through the fusion pipeline and displayed on the intra-biopsy 3D TRUS platform for needle guidance.…”

Section: Mri-3d Trus Fusion Biopsymentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of prostate MRI-3D transrectal ultrasound fusion biopsy for first-time and repeat biopsy patients with previous atypical small acinar proliferation

Cool

Romagnoli

Izawa

et al. 2016

CUAJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: This study evaluates the clinical benefit of magnetic resonance-transrectal ultrasound (MR-TRUS) fusion biopsy over systematic biopsy between first-time and repeat prostate biopsy patients with prior atypical small acinar proliferation (ASAP). Materials: 100 patients were enrolled in a single-centre prospective cohort study: 50 for first biopsy, 50 for repeat biopsy with prior ASAP. Multiparameteric magnetic resonance imaging (MP-MRI) and standard 12-core ultrasound biopsy (Std-Bx) were performed on all patients. Targeted biopsy using MRI-TRUS fusion (Fn-Bx) was performed f suspicious lesions were identified on the prebiopsy MP-MRI. Classification of clinically significant disease was assessed independently for the Std-Bx vs. Fn-Bx cores to compare the two approaches. Results: Adenocarcinoma was detected in 49/100 patients (26 first biopsy, 23 ASAP biopsy), with 25 having significant disease (17 first, 8 ASAP). Fn-Bx demonstrated significantly higher per-core cancer detection rates, cancer involvement, and Gleason scores for first-time and ASAP patients. However, Fn-Bx was significantly more likely to detect significant cancer missed on Std-Bx for ASAP patients than first-time biopsy patients. The addition of Fn-Bx to Std-Bx for ASAP patients had a 166.7% relative risk reduction for missing Gleason ≥ 3 + 4 disease (number needed to image with MP-MRI=10 patients) compared to 6.3% for first biopsy (number to image=50 patients). Negative predictive value of MP-MRI for negative biopsy was 79% for first-time and 100% for ASAP patients, with median followup of 32.1 ± 15.5 months. Conclusions: MR-TRUS Fn-Bx has a greater clinical impact for repeat biopsy patients with prior ASAP than biopsy-naïve patients by detecting more significant cancers that are missed on Std-Bx.

show abstract

Section: Mri-3d Trus Fusion Biopsymentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of prostate MRI-3D transrectal ultrasound fusion biopsy for first-time and repeat biopsy patients with previous atypical small acinar proliferation

Cool

Romagnoli

Izawa

et al. 2016

CUAJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Thus, an efficient and accurate prostate segmentation method for both 3-D MR and TRUS images is highly desired for the surface-based MR to 3-D TRUS registration [6], [7]. In addition, prostate segmentation from 3-D TRUS and MRI plays a key role in clinical decision making process.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Prostate Segmentation: An Efficient Convex Optimization Approach With Axial Symmetry Using 3-D TRUS and MR Images

Qiu

Yuan

Ukwatta

et al. 2014

IEEE Trans. Med. Imaging

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We propose a novel global optimization-based approach to segmentation of 3-D prostate transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) and T2 weighted magnetic resonance (MR) images, enforcing inherent axial symmetry of prostate shapes to simultaneously adjust a series of 2-D slice-wise segmentations in a "global" 3-D sense. We show that the introduced challenging combinatorial optimization problem can be solved globally and exactly by means of convex relaxation. In this regard, we propose a novel coherent continuous max-flow model (CCMFM), which derives a new and efficient duality-based algorithm, leading to a GPU-based implementation to achieve high computational speeds. Experiments with 25 3-D TRUS images and 30 3-D T2w MR images from our dataset, and 50 3-D T2w MR images from a public dataset, demonstrate that the proposed approach can segment a 3-D prostate TRUS/MR image within 5-6 s including 4-5 s for initialization, yielding a mean Dice similarity coefficient of 93.2%±2.0% for 3-D TRUS images and 88.5%±3.5% for 3-D MR images. The proposed method also yields relatively low intra- and inter-observer variability introduced by user manual initialization, suggesting a high reproducibility, independent of observers.

show abstract

“…Our previous error model assumed an overall needle delivery error that was isotropic and contained no systematic components. However, we know that there are both systematic errors and error anisotropy involved in our fusion biopsy system 8,9 , and it is reasonable to consider that such errors could be present in any percutaneous needle delivery device. It is the purpose of this work to investigate the effects of systematic errors and error anisotropy on predicted tumor sampling probabilities.…”

Section: Description Of Purposementioning

confidence: 98%

Optimizing MRI-targeted fusion prostate biopsy: the effect of systematic error and anisotropy on tumor sampling

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-targeted, 3D transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided "fusion" prostate biopsy aims to reduce the 21-47% false negative rate of clinical 2D TRUS-guided sextant biopsy. Although it has been reported to double the positive yield, MRI-targeted biopsy still has a substantial false negative rate. Therefore, we propose optimization of biopsy targeting to meet the clinician's desired tumor sampling probability, optimizing needle targets within each tumor and accounting for uncertainties due to guidance system errors, image registration errors, and irregular tumor shapes. As a step toward this optimization, we obtained multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) and 3D TRUS images from 49 patients. A radiologist and radiology resident contoured 81 suspicious regions, yielding 3D surfaces that were registered to 3D TRUS. We estimated the probability, , of obtaining a tumor sample with a single biopsy, and investigated the effects of systematic errors and anisotropy on . Our experiments indicated that a biopsy system's lateral and elevational errors have a much greater effect on sampling probabilities, relative to its axial error. We have also determined that for a system with RMS error of 3.5 mm, tumors of volume 1.9 cm 3 and smaller may require more than one biopsy core to ensure 95% probability of a sample with 50% core involvement, and tumors 1.0 cm 3 and smaller may require more than two cores.Keywords: Prostate cancer diagnosis, 3D guided biopsy planning, 3D ultrasound, 3D tumor shape, needle guidance error, anisotropic guidance error, systematic guidance error. DESCRIPTION OF PURPOSEThe current clinical standard for prostate cancer (PCa) diagnosis is 2D transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided biopsy. As PCa is seldom detectable on ultrasound, a systematic template commonly containing 6 or 12 cores is used to guide the biopsy needle. However, this approach has been shown to have up to a 21-47% false negative rate and therefore many patients return to the clinic for repeat biopsies 1,2 . Additionally, this biopsy method may underestimate the true Gleason score of a patient's cancer 3 .It has been shown that mpMRI is effective for PCa detection and localisation 4 . To avoid the cost of in-bore MRIguided biopsy and enable widespread implementation in an office setting, 3D TRUS-guided biopsy systems were developed to improve upon the spatial information of 2D TRUS and allow for MRI targeting via image registration. A 3D TRUS biopsy system with MRI-3D TRUS fusion ("fusion biopsy") has been shown to produce significantly higher (p < 0.01) positive biopsy core rates, mean Gleason scores and tumor volumes sampled, compared to 2D-TRUS guided 12-core systematic biopsy 5 . Although fusion biopsy increased positive core rates, there is clinically significant room for further improvement. This approach may be further improved by investigating the overall uncertainty in delivering a biopsy needle to a point target within a 3D contour.There have been two recent studies that provide insight into potential avenues for impro...

show abstract

Evaluation of intersession 3D‐TRUS to 3D‐TRUS image registration for repeat prostate biopsies

Cited by 16 publications

References 27 publications

Comparison of prostate MRI-3D transrectal ultrasound fusion biopsy for first-time and repeat biopsy patients with previous atypical small acinar proliferation

Comparison of prostate MRI-3D transrectal ultrasound fusion biopsy for first-time and repeat biopsy patients with previous atypical small acinar proliferation

Prostate Segmentation: An Efficient Convex Optimization Approach With Axial Symmetry Using 3-D TRUS and MR Images

Optimizing MRI-targeted fusion prostate biopsy: the effect of systematic error and anisotropy on tumor sampling

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About