Evaluation of MRI-TRUS Fusion Versus Cognitive Registration Accuracy for MRI-Targeted, TRUS-Guided Prostate Biopsy

Cool, Derek W.; Zhang, Xuli; Romagnoli, Cesare; Izawa, Jonathan I.; Romano, Walter; Fenster, Aaron

doi:10.2214/ajr.14.12681

Cited by 83 publications

(60 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In the other study, a software-based targeted strategy detected more clinically significant cancers than did a cognitive strategy, 20.3% vs. 15.1%, respectively (P ¼ 0.05) [13]. Another simulation study suggested that this difference might be wider, and more than 50% clinically significant cancer detected by software-based targeted biopsy might be missed by visually directed targeted biopsy [14]. Finally, software-based targeted biopsies may have an additional advantage in that images with prior sampling designated on them are stored so that further biopsies at a different time of the same areas are possible.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 90%

Visually directed vs. software-based targeted biopsy compared to transperineal template mapping biopsy in the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer

Valério

McCartan

Freeman

et al. 2015

Urologic Oncology: Seminars and Original Investigations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 90%

Visually directed vs. software-based targeted biopsy compared to transperineal template mapping biopsy in the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer

Valério

McCartan

Freeman

et al. 2015

Urologic Oncology: Seminars and Original Investigations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…MRI-targeted, TRUS-guided biopsy is likely best performed through fusion of MRI to 3D TRUS (MRI-TRUS fusion) rather than attempting to cognitively infer the MRI lesion location on standard non-fusion TRUS. 5,[14][15][16] While MRI-guided and MRI-TRUS fusion approaches have merit, MRI-TRUS fusion biopsy (Fn-Bx) allows for real-time needle visualization and can be performed in a clinical setting using a standard 2D TRUS probe incorporated into a 3D system, 13 rather than in an MRI suite with specialized MRI-compatible hardware. 8 Fn-Bx has demonstrated higher per-core CaP detection rates, higher Gleason grades, and higher percentage of tumour involvement within targeted cores as compared to systematic biopsy.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

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

Self Cite

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

“…Where TRUS is used to guide targeted biopsy, electronic fusion of magnetic resonance images with TRUS images can be performed to guide biopsy (14,15), or "cognitive fusion" can be used (16), by which the operator prospectively reviews the MRI appearances and uses TRUS to guide targeted sampling of the area of suspected tumor in the prostate gland.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

MRI-directed cognitive fusion-guided biopsy of the anterior prostate tumors

Murphy¹,

NiMhurchu²,

Gibney³

et al. 2017

Diagn Interv Radiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Evaluation of MRI-TRUS Fusion Versus Cognitive Registration Accuracy for MRI-Targeted, TRUS-Guided Prostate Biopsy

Cited by 83 publications

References 38 publications

Visually directed vs. software-based targeted biopsy compared to transperineal template mapping biopsy in the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer

Visually directed vs. software-based targeted biopsy compared to transperineal template mapping biopsy in the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer

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

MRI-directed cognitive fusion-guided biopsy of the anterior prostate tumors

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About