Dataset Information

Prostate Cancer Detection Rate of Manually Operated and Robot-assisted In-bore Magnetic Resonance Imaging Targeted Biopsy.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The diagnostic efficacy regarding prostate cancer (PC) detection by manually operated in-bore magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) targeted prostate biopsy (MO-MRGB) versus robot-assisted in-bore MRI targeted prostate biopsy (RA-MRGB) is lacking evidence.

Objective

We hypothesized that the detection rates (DRs) for PC of MO-MRGB and RA-MRGB were similar and aimed to compare these.

Design setting and participants

We prospectively included all patients who received in-bore MRI targeted prostate biopsy (MRGB) of the prostate in the Central Denmark Region from August 2014 to February 2020. From August 2014, MO-MRGB was used, and from March 2018, RA-MRGB was preferred. Referral to in-bore MRGB was based on multiparametric MRI (mpMRI).

Outcome measurements and statistical analysis

We compared PC DRs of MO-MRGB and RA-MRGB with Pearson's chi-square test. We made three binary regression models and calculated the risk difference (RD) of PC between the in-bore MRGB systems.

Results and limitations

A total of 3107 patients were referred to mpMRI, and 884 (28%) patients went on to receive in-bore MRGB. The MO-MRGB and RA-MRGB systems were used in 505 (57%) and 379 (43%) patients, respectively. Taking clinically relevant covariates into account, we found no statistically significant difference in PC DRs between MO-MRGB and RA-MRGB (72% vs 73%, RD 1%, 95% confidence interval -4% to 7%, p = 0.6). The main limitation was a shift in population characteristics.

Conclusions

We did not see evidence of an effect on the DR or the RD for PC when we compared MO-MRGB with RA-MRGB. Cost effectiveness should be considered carefully when choosing the MRGB system.

Patient summary

We compared two magnetic resonance imaging guided prostate tissue sampling systems regarding prostate cancer (PC) detection. One system was manually operated, and the other system was robot assisted. Comparing the systems, we found no evidence of a difference in their ability to detect PC.

SUBMITTER: Sandahl M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9257664 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundEndomyocardial biopsies (EMB) are an important diagnostic tool for myocarditis and other infiltrative cardiac diseases. Routinely, biopsies are obtained under fluoroscopic guidance with a substantial radiation burden. Despite procedural success, there is a large sampling error caused by missing the affected myocardium. Therefore, multiple (>6) biopsies are taken in the clinical setting. In cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR), late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) depicts areas of affected myocardium in myocarditis or in other infiltrative cardiomyopathies. Thus, targeted biopsy under real-time CMR image guidance might reduce the problem of sampling error.MethodsSeven minipigs of the Goettingen strain underwent radiofrequency ablation in the left ventricle. At least two focal lesions were induced on the lateral wall in five and the apex in two animals. Each ablation lesion was created by two consecutive 30 sec ablations (max. 30 W, temperature 60-64 °C). Biopsies were taken immediately after lesion induction using a commercially available 7 F conventional bioptome under fluoroscopic guidance at the ablation site. Afterwards the animals underwent CMR and lesion visualization by LGE at 3T. The lesions were then targeted and biopsied under CMR-guidance using a MR-conditional bioptome guided by a steerable catheter. Interactive real-time (RT) visualization of the intervention on an in-room monitor was based on radial FLASH with nonlinear inverse reconstruction (NLINV) at a temporal resolution of 42 ms. All samples underwent a standard histological evaluation.ResultsRadiofrequency ablation was successful in all animals. Fluoroscopy-guided biopsies were performed with a success rate of 6/6 minipigs - resulting in a nonlethal pericardial effusion in one animal. Visualization of radiofrequency lesions by CMR was successful in 7/7 minipig, i.e. at least one lesion was clearly visible. Localization and tracking of the catheters and the bioptome using interactive control of the imaging plane was achieved in 6/6 MP; however in the animal with a large pericardial effusion after EMB under fluoroscopy no further EMB was attempted for safety reasons. Biopsies under interactive RT-CMR guidance were successfully performed in 5/6 animals, in one animal the bioptome reached the lesion, however the forceps did not cut out a sample. Specimens obtained under CMR guidance contained part of the lesion in 6/15 (40%) myocardial specimens and in 4/5 (80%) animals in which samples were achieved. Conventional biopsies revealed ablation lesions in 4/17 (23.5%) specimens in 3/6 minipigs (50%).ConclusionFocal lesions induced by radiofrequency ablation in a minipig model are a useful tool for CMR-guided biopsy studies. In contrast to fluoroscopy, CMR provides excellent visualization of lesions. Interactive real-time CMR allows excellent passive tracking of the instruments and EMB provides significantly superior sampling accuracy compared to fluoroscopy-guided biopsies. Nonetheless, further improvements of MR-compatible bioptomes and guiding catheters are essential before applying this method in a clinical setting.

Project description:PurposeMultiple studies demonstrate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-targeted biopsy detects more clinically significant cancer than systematic biopsy; however, some clinically significant cancers are detected by systematic biopsy only. While these events are rare, we sought to perform a retrospective analysis of these cases to ascertain the reasons that MRI-targeted biopsy missed clinically significant cancer which was subsequently detected on systematic prostate biopsy.Materials and methodsPatients were enrolled in a prospective study comparing cancer detection rates by transrectal MRI-targeted fusion biopsy and systematic 12-core biopsy. Patients with an elevated prostate specific antigen (PSA), abnormal digital rectal examination, or imaging findings concerning for prostate cancer underwent prostate MRI and subsequent MRI-targeted and systematic biopsy in the same setting. The subset of patients with grade group (GG) ≥3 cancer found on systematic biopsy and GG ≤2 cancer (or no cancer) on MRI-targeted biopsy was classified as MRI-targeted biopsy misses. A retrospective analysis of the MRI and MRI-targeted biopsy real-time screen captures determined the cause of MRI-targeted biopsy miss. Multivariable logistic regression analysis compared baseline characteristics of patients with MRI-targeted biopsy misses to GG-matched patients whose clinically significant cancer was detected by MRI-targeted biopsy.ResultsOver the study period of 2007 to 2019, 2,103 patients met study inclusion criteria and underwent combined MRI-targeted and systematic prostate biopsies. A total of 41 (1.9%) men were classified as MRI-targeted biopsy misses. Most MRI-targeted biopsy misses were due to errors in lesion targeting (21, 51.2%), followed by MRI-invisible lesions (17, 40.5%) and MRI lesions missed by the radiologist (3, 7.1%). On logistic regression analysis, lower Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADSTM) score was associated with having clinically significant cancer missed on MRI-targeted biopsy.ConclusionsWhile uncommon, most MRI-targeted biopsy misses are due to errors in lesion targeting, which highlights the importance of accurate co-registration and targeting when using software-based fusion platforms. Additionally, some patients will harbor MRI-invisible lesions which are untargetable by MRI-targeted platforms. The presence of a low PI-RADS score despite a high PSA is suggestive of harboring an MRI-invisible lesion.

Project description:Take Home Message In biopsy-naïve patients suspected for prostate cancer, we propose that in case of nonsuspicious multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI), one could abstain from systematic biopsies after careful shared decision-making. Systematic biopsies add a substantial number of clinically significant prostate cancer cases and should not be omitted in case of suspicious mpMRI. Background It remains uncertain whether transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided systematic biopsies can be omitted and rely solely on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging–targeted biopsies (MRI-TBx) in biopsy-naïve men suspected of prostate cancer (PCa). Objective To compare PCa detection in biopsy-naïve men between systematic biopsy and MRI-TBx. Design, setting, and participants A prospective cohort study was conducted in a Dutch teaching hospital. Consecutive patients with suspected PCa, no history of biopsy, and no clinical suspicion of metastasis underwent both TRUS-guided systematic biopsies and MRI-TBx by multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI)-ultrasound fusion, including sham biopsies in case of negative mpMRI. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis Clinically significant PCa (csPCa), defined as group ≥2 on the International Society of Urological Pathology grading, was detected. Results and limitations The overall prevalence of csPCa, irrespective of biopsy technique, was 37.4% (132/353) in our population. MRI-TBx were performed in 263/353 (74.5%) patients with suspicious mpMRI (Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System [PI-RADS] ≥3). The detection rates for csPCa were 39.5% for MRI-TBx and 42.9% for systematic biopsies. The added values, defined as the additional percentages of patients with csPCa detected by adding one biopsy technique, were 8.7% for the systematic biopsies and 5.3% for MRI-TBx. In patients with nonsuspicious mpMRI, five cases (6%) of csPCa were found by systematic biopsies. Conclusions This study in biopsy-naïve patients suspected for PCa showed that systematic biopsies have added value to MRI-TBx alone in patients with mpMRI PI-RADS >2. Patient summary We studied magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-guided prostate biopsy for diagnosing prostate cancer and compared it with the standard method of prostate biopsy. Standard systematic biopsies cannot be omitted in patients with suspicious MRI, as they add to the detection of significant prostate cancer.