Cargando…
TRUS-MR Fusion Biopsy of the Prostate: Radiological and Histological Correlation
OBJECTIVE: Targeted magnetic resonance/ultrasound fusion prostate biopsy has been shown to improve the detection of high-grade prostate cancer and to reduce sampling errors. Our objective is to assess MR-TRUS targeted fusion biopsy versus standard biopsy for the detection of clinically significant t...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Ubiquity Press
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5854241/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30038992 http://dx.doi.org/10.5334/jbr-btr.1199 |
_version_ | 1783306875335344128 |
---|---|
author | Lavaerts, Michel De Wever, Liesbeth Vanhoutte, Els De Keyzer, Frederik Oyen, Raymond |
author_facet | Lavaerts, Michel De Wever, Liesbeth Vanhoutte, Els De Keyzer, Frederik Oyen, Raymond |
author_sort | Lavaerts, Michel |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVE: Targeted magnetic resonance/ultrasound fusion prostate biopsy has been shown to improve the detection of high-grade prostate cancer and to reduce sampling errors. Our objective is to assess MR-TRUS targeted fusion biopsy versus standard biopsy for the detection of clinically significant tumors. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients were referred for abnormal digital rectal examination (DRE) or risen prostate-specific antigen (PSA). If an MRI-visible lesion was detected, they were included in the study. In total, 102 men underwent MRI followed by MR-TRUS fusion biopsy between November 2014 and January 2016. Tumor grading was done with the clinical relevance in mind; a cutoff was used at Gleason 7 or higher. Standard biopsy results were collected from clinical practice during 2005 at the same institution to provide baseline values. RESULTS: A comparable rate of prostate cancer is found whether sampling is done at random (42.4%) or with the use of fusion biopsy (44.1%). However, these percentages are histologically different: fewer low-grade tumors are detected with MR-TRUS fusion biopsy (–19.1%), while more high-grade tumors are diagnosed (+26%). If there is an ultrasound-visible lesion in the prostate, the gain of combined MRI and fusion biopsy is less impressive. CONCLUSION: Fusion biopsy can provide more accurate information for optimal patient management, as it detects a higher percentage of high-grade prostate cancers than random sampling. Furthermore, nonrelevant tumors are less commonly detected using fusion biopsy. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5854241 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2016 |
publisher | Ubiquity Press |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-58542412018-07-23 TRUS-MR Fusion Biopsy of the Prostate: Radiological and Histological Correlation Lavaerts, Michel De Wever, Liesbeth Vanhoutte, Els De Keyzer, Frederik Oyen, Raymond J Belg Soc Radiol Original Article OBJECTIVE: Targeted magnetic resonance/ultrasound fusion prostate biopsy has been shown to improve the detection of high-grade prostate cancer and to reduce sampling errors. Our objective is to assess MR-TRUS targeted fusion biopsy versus standard biopsy for the detection of clinically significant tumors. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients were referred for abnormal digital rectal examination (DRE) or risen prostate-specific antigen (PSA). If an MRI-visible lesion was detected, they were included in the study. In total, 102 men underwent MRI followed by MR-TRUS fusion biopsy between November 2014 and January 2016. Tumor grading was done with the clinical relevance in mind; a cutoff was used at Gleason 7 or higher. Standard biopsy results were collected from clinical practice during 2005 at the same institution to provide baseline values. RESULTS: A comparable rate of prostate cancer is found whether sampling is done at random (42.4%) or with the use of fusion biopsy (44.1%). However, these percentages are histologically different: fewer low-grade tumors are detected with MR-TRUS fusion biopsy (–19.1%), while more high-grade tumors are diagnosed (+26%). If there is an ultrasound-visible lesion in the prostate, the gain of combined MRI and fusion biopsy is less impressive. CONCLUSION: Fusion biopsy can provide more accurate information for optimal patient management, as it detects a higher percentage of high-grade prostate cancers than random sampling. Furthermore, nonrelevant tumors are less commonly detected using fusion biopsy. Ubiquity Press 2016-11-24 /pmc/articles/PMC5854241/ /pubmed/30038992 http://dx.doi.org/10.5334/jbr-btr.1199 Text en Copyright: © 2016 The Author(s) http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC-BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. See http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. |
spellingShingle | Original Article Lavaerts, Michel De Wever, Liesbeth Vanhoutte, Els De Keyzer, Frederik Oyen, Raymond TRUS-MR Fusion Biopsy of the Prostate: Radiological and Histological Correlation |
title | TRUS-MR Fusion Biopsy of the Prostate: Radiological and Histological Correlation |
title_full | TRUS-MR Fusion Biopsy of the Prostate: Radiological and Histological Correlation |
title_fullStr | TRUS-MR Fusion Biopsy of the Prostate: Radiological and Histological Correlation |
title_full_unstemmed | TRUS-MR Fusion Biopsy of the Prostate: Radiological and Histological Correlation |
title_short | TRUS-MR Fusion Biopsy of the Prostate: Radiological and Histological Correlation |
title_sort | trus-mr fusion biopsy of the prostate: radiological and histological correlation |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5854241/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30038992 http://dx.doi.org/10.5334/jbr-btr.1199 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT lavaertsmichel trusmrfusionbiopsyoftheprostateradiologicalandhistologicalcorrelation AT deweverliesbeth trusmrfusionbiopsyoftheprostateradiologicalandhistologicalcorrelation AT vanhoutteels trusmrfusionbiopsyoftheprostateradiologicalandhistologicalcorrelation AT dekeyzerfrederik trusmrfusionbiopsyoftheprostateradiologicalandhistologicalcorrelation AT oyenraymond trusmrfusionbiopsyoftheprostateradiologicalandhistologicalcorrelation |