Table of Contents Author Guidelines Submit a Manuscript
Prostate Cancer
Volume 2016 (2016), Article ID 3794738, 8 pages
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2016/3794738
Research Article

Assessment of the Performance of Magnetic Resonance Imaging/Ultrasound Fusion Guided Prostate Biopsy against a Combined Targeted Plus Systematic Biopsy Approach Using 24-Core Transperineal Template Saturation Mapping Prostate Biopsy

1St. Vincent’s Prostate Cancer Centre, Darlinghurst, NSW 2010, Australia
2Garvan Institute of Medical Research, The Kinghorn Cancer Centre, Darlinghurst, NSW 2010, Australia
3School of Medicine, University of New South Wales, Kensington, NSW 2052, Australia
4Southern Radiology, Randwick, NSW 2031, Australia
5Spectrum Radiology, Randwick, NSW 2031, Australia
6Douglas Hanly Moir Pathology, Macquarie Park, NSW 2113, Australia

Received 27 December 2015; Accepted 12 April 2016

Academic Editor: Bruce J. Trock

Copyright © 2016 Francis Ting et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Linked References

  1. C. Gosselaar, R. Kranse, M. J. Roobol, S. Roemeling, and F. H. Schröder, “The interobserver variability of digital rectal examination in a large randomized trial for the screening of prostate cancer,” Prostate, vol. 68, no. 9, pp. 985–993, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  2. F. H. Schroder, P. van der Maas, P. Beemsterboer, A. B. Kruger, R. Hoedemaeker, J. Rietbergen et al., “Evaluation of the digital rectal examination as a screening test for prostate cancer. Rotterdam section of the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer,” Journal of the National Cancer Institute, vol. 90, no. 23, pp. 1817–1823, 1998. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  3. I. M. Thompson, D. P. Ankerst, C. Chi et al., “Operating characteristics of prostate-specific antigen in men with an initial PSA level of 3.0 ng/mL or lower,” The Journal of the American Medical Association, vol. 294, no. 1, pp. 66–70, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  4. O. Ukimura, J. A. Coleman, A. de la Taille et al., “Contemporary role of systematic prostate biopsies: Indications, techniques, and implications for patient care,” European Urology, vol. 63, no. 2, pp. 214–230, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  5. A. V. D'Amico, A. A. Renshaw, L. Arsenault, D. Schultz, and J. P. Richie, “Clinical predictors of upgrading to gleason grade 4 or 5 disease at radical prostatectomy: potential implications for patient selection for radiation and androgen suppression therapy,” International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics, vol. 45, no. 4, pp. 841–846, 1999. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  6. S. Scott, H. Samaratunga, C. Chabert, M. Breckenridge, and T. Gianduzzo, “Is transperineal prostate biopsy more accurate than transrectal biopsy in determining final Gleason score and clinical risk category? A comparative analysis,” BJU International, vol. 116, supplement 3, pp. 26–30, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  7. M. Valerio, I. Donaldson, M. Emberton et al., “Detection of clinically significant prostate cancer using magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion targeted biopsy: a systematic review,” European Urology, vol. 68, no. 1, pp. 8–19, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  8. J. Wu, A. Ji, B. Xie et al., “Is magnetic resonance/ultrasound fusion prostate biopsy better than systematic prostate biopsy? An updated meta- and trial sequential analysis,” Oncotarget, vol. 6, no. 41, pp. 43571–43580, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  9. I. G. Schoots, M. J. Roobol, D. Nieboer, C. H. Bangma, E. W. Steyerberg, and M. G. M. Hunink, “Magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy may enhance the diagnostic accuracy of significant prostate cancer detection compared to standard transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy: a systematic review and meta-analysis,” European Urology, vol. 68, no. 3, pp. 438–450, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  10. C. M. Moore, V. Kasivisvanathan, S. Eggener et al., “Standards of reporting for MRI-targeted biopsy studies (START) of the prostate: recommendations from an international working group,” European Urology, vol. 64, no. 4, pp. 544–552, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  11. J. C. Weinreb, J. O. Barentsz, P. L. Choyke et al., “Pi-rads prostate imaging—reporting and data system: 2015, version 2,” European Urology, vol. 69, no. 1, pp. 16–40, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  12. H. Cash, A. Maxeiner, C. Stephan et al., “The detection of significant prostate cancer is correlated with the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) in MRI/transrectal ultrasound fusion biopsy,” World Journal of Urology, vol. 34, no. 4, pp. 525–532, 2016. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  13. J. E. Thompson, D. Moses, R. Shnier et al., “Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging guided diagnostic biopsy detects significant prostate cancer and could reduce unnecessary biopsies and over detection: a prospective study,” The Journal of Urology, vol. 192, no. 1, pp. 67–74, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  14. J. E. Thompson, P. J. van Leeuwen, D. Moses et al., “The diagnostic performance of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging to detect significant prostate cancer,” The Journal of Urology, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  15. D. Portalez, P. Mozer, F. Cornud et al., “Validation of the European Society of Urogenital Radiology scoring system for prostate cancer diagnosis on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in a cohort of repeat biopsy patients,” European Urology, vol. 62, no. 6, pp. 986–996, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  16. F. Distler, J. P. Radtke, C. Kesch et al., “Value of MRI/ultrasound fusion in primary biopsy for the diagnosis of prostate cancer,” Der Urologe, vol. 55, no. 2, pp. 146–155, 2016. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  17. J. P. Radtke, T. H. Kuru, S. Boxler et al., “Comparative Analysis of transperineal template saturation prostate biopsy versus magnetic resonance imaging targeted biopsy with magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion guidance,” The Journal of Urology, vol. 193, no. 1, pp. 87–94, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  18. M. Valerio, N. McCartan, A. Freeman, S. Punwani, M. Emberton, and H. U. Ahmed, “Visually directed vs. software-based targeted biopsy compared to transperineal template mapping biopsy in the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer,” Urologic Oncology, vol. 33, no. 10, pp. 424.e9–424.e16, 2015. View at Google Scholar
  19. M. A. Bjurlin, H. B. Carter, P. Schellhammer et al., “Optimization of initial prostate biopsy in clinical practice: sampling, labeling and specimen processing,” The Journal of Urology, vol. 189, no. 6, pp. 2039–2046, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  20. L. Dickinson, H. U. Ahmed, C. Allen et al., “Magnetic resonance imaging for the detection, localisation, and characterisation of prostate cancer: recommendations from a European consensus meeting,” European Urology, vol. 59, no. 4, pp. 477–494, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  21. W. Barzell WIW and G. Andriole, Transperineal Template Guided Saturation Biopsy of the Prostate: Rationale, Indications and Technique. Urology Times, vol. 31, Andriole G. Transperineal Template Guided Saturation Biopsy of the Prostate, Rationale, 2003.
  22. J. L. Wright, C. A. Salinas, D. W. Lin et al., “Prostate cancer specific mortality and gleason 7 disease differences in prostate cancer outcomes between cases with gleason 4 + 3 and gleason 3 + 4 tumors in a population based cohort,” The Journal of Urology, vol. 182, no. 6, pp. 2702–2707, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  23. B. Gershman, A. L. Zietman, A. S. Feldman, and W. S. McDougal, “Transperineal template-guided prostate biopsy for patients with persistently elevated PSA and multiple prior negative biopsies,” Urologic Oncology: Seminars and Original Investigations, vol. 31, no. 7, pp. 1093–1097, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  24. P. Mozer, M. Rouprêt, C. Le Cossec et al., “First round of targeted biopsies using magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasonography fusion compared with conventional transrectal ultrasonography-guided biopsies for the diagnosis of localised prostate cancer,” BJU International, vol. 115, no. 1, pp. 50–57, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  25. A. R. Rastinehad, B. Turkbey, S. S. Salami et al., “Improving detection of clinically significant prostate cancer: magnetic resonance imaging/transrectal ultrasound fusion guided prostate biopsy,” The Journal of Urology, vol. 191, no. 6, pp. 1749–1754, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  26. M. M. Siddiqui, S. Rais-Bahrami, H. Truong et al., “Magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound-fusion biopsy significantly upgrades prostate cancer versus systematic 12-core transrectal ultrasound biopsy,” European Urology, vol. 64, no. 5, pp. 713–719, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  27. M. M. Siddiqui, S. Rais-Bahrami, B. Turkbey et al., “Comparison of MR/ultrasound fusion-guided biopsy with ultrasound-guided biopsy for the diagnosis of prostate cancer,” The Journal of the American Medical Association, vol. 313, no. 4, pp. 390–397, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  28. N. Bittner, G. S. Merrick, A. Bennett et al., “Diagnostic performance of initial transperineal template-guided mapping biopsy of the prostate gland,” American Journal of Clinical Oncology, vol. 38, no. 3, pp. 300–303, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  29. T. Klatte, N. Swietek, G. Schatzl, and M. Waldert, “Transperineal template-guided biopsy for diagnosis of prostate cancer in patients with at least two prior negative biopsies,” Wiener Klinische Wochenschrift, vol. 125, no. 21-22, pp. 669–673, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  30. N. Bittner, G. S. Merrick, W. M. Butler, A. Bennett, and R. W. Galbreath, “Incidence and pathological features of prostate cancer detected on transperineal template guided mapping biopsy after negative transrectal ultrasound guided biopsy,” The Journal of Urology, vol. 190, no. 2, pp. 509–514, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  31. M. Abd-Alazeez, A. Kirkham, H. U. Ahmed et al., “Performance of multiparametric MRI in men at risk of prostate cancer before the first biopsy: a paired validating cohort study using template prostate mapping biopsies as the reference standard,” Prostate Cancer and Prostatic Diseases, vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 40–46, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  32. K. Chamie, G. A. Sonn, D. S. Finley et al., “The role of magnetic resonance imaging in delineating clinically significant prostate cancer,” Urology, vol. 83, no. 2, pp. 369–375, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  33. S. Rais-Bahrami, M. M. Siddiqui, B. Turkbey et al., “Utility of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging suspicion levels for detecting prostate cancer,” The Journal of Urology, vol. 190, no. 5, pp. 1721–1727, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  34. P. Rouse, G. Shaw, H. U. Ahmed, A. Freeman, C. Allen, and M. Emberton, “Multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging to rule-in and rule-out clinically important prostate cancer in men at risk: a cohort study,” Urologia Internationalis, vol. 87, no. 1, pp. 49–53, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  35. P. J. De Visschere, L. Naesens, L. Libbrecht et al., “What kind of prostate cancers do we miss on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging?” European Radiology, vol. 26, no. 4, pp. 1098–1107, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  36. N. Arumainayagam, H. U. Ahmed, C. M. Moore et al., “Multiparametric MR imaging for detection of clinically significant prostate cancer: a validation cohort study with transperineal template prostate mapping as the reference standard,” Radiology, vol. 268, no. 3, pp. 761–769, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  37. M. Abd-Alazeez, H. U. Ahmed, M. Arya et al., “The accuracy of multiparametric MRI in men with negative biopsy and elevated PSA level-can it rule out clinically significant prostate cancer?” Urologic Oncology: Seminars and Original Investigations, vol. 32, no. 1, pp. 45–e22, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  38. K. C. Latchamsetty, L. S. Borden Jr., C. R. Porter et al., “Experience improves staging accuracy of endorectal magnetic resonance imaging in prostate cancer: what is the learning curve?” The Canadian Journal of Urology, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 3429–3434, 2007. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  39. O. Akin, C. C. Riedl, N. M. Ishill, C. S. Moskowitz, J. Zhang, and H. Hricak, “Interactive dedicated training curriculum improves accuracy in the interpretation of MR imaging of prostate cancer,” European Radiology, vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 995–1002, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  40. H. Cash, K. Günzel, A. Maxeiner et al., “Prostate cancer detection on transrectal ultrasonography-guided random biopsy despite negative real-time magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasonography fusion-guided targeted biopsy: reasons for targeted biopsy failure,” BJU International, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  41. G. Ploussard, N. Nicolaiew, C. Marchand et al., “Prospective evaluation of an extended 21-core biopsy scheme as initial prostate cancer diagnostic strategy,” European Urology, vol. 65, no. 1, pp. 154–161, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  42. M. Valerio, C. Anele, A. Freeman et al., “Identifying the index lesion with template prostate mapping biopsies,” The Journal of Urology, vol. 193, no. 4, pp. 1185–1190, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  43. A. B. Barqawi, K. O. Rove, S. Gholizadeh, C. I. O'Donnell, H. Koul, and E. D. Crawford, “The role of 3-dimensional mapping biopsy in decision making for treatment of apparent early stage prostate cancer,” The Journal of Urology, vol. 186, no. 1, pp. 80–85, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus