Search

Introduction High-resolution micro-ultrasound (micro-US) is a novel precise imaging modality that allows targeted prostate biopsies and multiparametric magnet resonance imaging (mpMRI) fusion. Its high resolution relying on a 29 MHz transducer allows real-time visualisation of prostate cancer lesions; this might overcome the inaccuracy of conventional MRI-US fusion biopsy strategies. We compared cancer detection rates in patients who underwent transrectal (TR-B) versus transperineal (TP-B) MR-micro-US fusion biopsy. Materials and methods 1:2 propensity score matching was performed in 322 consecutive procedures: 56 TR-B and 266 TP-B. All prostate biopsies were performed using ExactVuTM micro-US system with mpMRI image fusion. Clinically significant disease was defined as grade group ≥2. The primary objective was to evaluate the detection of clinically significant disease according to access route. The secondary outcomes were to compare the respective detection rates of random and targeted biopsies stratified per access route and to evaluate micro-US for its potential added value. Results 47 men undergoing TR-B and 88 undergoing TP-B were matched for age, PSA, clinical stage, prostate volume, PIRADS score, number of mpMRI-visible lesions and indication to biopsy. The detection rates of clinically significant and of any prostate cancer did not differ between the two groups (45% TR-B vs 42% TP-B; p = 0.8, and 57% TR-B vs 59% TP-B; p = 0.9, respectively). Detection rates also did not differ significantly between random (p = 0.4) and targeted biopsies (p = 0.7) stratified per access route. Micro-US targeted biopsy detected 36 MRI-invisible lesions in 33 patients; 19% of these lesions were positive for clinically significant disease. Overall, micro-US targeted biopsies upgraded 2% of patients to clinically significant disease that would have been missed otherwise. Conclusions MR-micro-US-fusion TR-B and TP-B have similar diagnostic yields in terms of detection rates of clinically significant prostate cancer. Micro-US targeted biopsy appears to have an additional diagnostic value over systematic and MRI-targeted biopsies.

The current recommendation in patients with a clinical suspicion for prostate cancer is to perform systematic biopsies extended with targeted biopsies, depending on mpMRI results. Following a positive mpMRI [i.e. Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) ≥3], three targeted biopsy approaches can be performed: visual registration of the MRI images with real-time ultrasound imaging; software-assisted fusion of the MRI images and real-time ultrasound images, and in-bore biopsy within the MR scanner. This collaborative review discusses the advantages and disadvantages of each targeting approach and elaborates on future developments. Cancer detection rates seem to mostly depend on practitioner experience and selection criteria (biopsy naïve, previous negative biopsy, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) selection criteria, presence of a lesion on MRI), and to a lesser extent dependent on biopsy technique. There is no clear consensus on the optimal targeting approach. The choice of technique depends on local experience and availability of equipment, individual patient characteristics, and onsite cost-benefit analysis. Innovations in imaging techniques and software-based algorithms may lead to further improvements in this field.

Background Active surveillance (AS) of low-risk prostate cancer (PCa) is an accepted alternative to active treatment. However, the conventional diagnostic trans-rectal ultrasound guided biopsies (TRUS-bx) underestimate PCa aggressiveness in almost half of the cases, when compared with the surgical specimen. Purpose To investigate if additional multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) of the prostate and MRI-guided in-bore biopsies (MRGB) at AS inclusion would improve selection of patients for active treatment. Material and Methods All patients enrolled in AS programs at two Danish centers, from October 2014 to January 2016, were offered an mpMRI 8–12 weeks after the initial diagnostic TRUS-bx. Candidates had low-risk disease (PSA 6 or GS 6 (3 + 3) lesions with ≥ 6 mm maximal cancer core length (MCCL). Results A total of 78 patients were included and in 21 patients a total of 22 PIRADS-score 4 or 5 lesions were detected. MRGB pathology revealed that 17 (81%) of these and 22% of the entire AS population harbored significant cancers at AS inclusion. In eight (38%) cases, the GS was upgraded. Also, nine patients (43%) had GS 6 (3 + 3) foci with MCCL ≥ 6 mm. Conclusion In an AS cohort based on TRUS and TRUS-bx diagnostic strategies, supplemental mpMRI and in-bore MRGB were able to efficiently reclassify a substantial number of patients as candidates for immediate active treatment.

Introduction: The study aimed to evaluate 3 different modalities of transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided prostate biopsies (PBs; 2D-, 3D- and targeted 3D-TRUS with fusion to MRI - T3D). Primary end point was the detection rate of prostate cancer (PC). Secondary end point was the detection rate of insignificant PC according to the Epstein criteria. Patients and Methods: Inclusion of 284 subsequent patients who underwent 2D-, 3D- or T3D PB from 2011 to 2015. All patients having PB for initial PC detection with a serum prostate-specific antigen value ≤20 ng/ml were included. Patients with T4 and/or clinical and/or radiological metastatic disease, so as these under active surveillance were excluded. Results: Patients with T3D PB had a significantly higher detection rate of PC (58 vs. 19% for 2D and 38% for 3D biopsies; p = 0.001), with no difference in Gleason score distribution (p = 0.644), as well as detection rate of low-risk cancers (p = 0.914). Main predictive factor for positive biopsies was the technique used, with respectively a 3- and 8-fold higher detection rate in the 3D- and T3D group. For T3D-PB, there was a significant correlation between radiological cancer suspicion (Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Score) and cancer detection rate (p = 0.02). Conclusions: T3D PB should be preferred over 2D PB and 3D PB in patients with suspected PC as it improves the cancer detection rate.

Background: The diagnostic pathway for prostate cancer (PCa) is advancing towards an imaging-driven approach. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging, although increasingly used, has not shown sufficient accuracy to replace biopsy for now. The introduction of new ultrasound (US) modalities, such as quantitative contrast-enhanced US (CEUS) and shear wave elastography (SWE), shows promise but is not evidenced by sufficient high quality studies, especially for the combination of different US modalities. The primary objective of this study is to determine the individual and complementary diagnostic performance of greyscale US (GS), SWE, CEUS and their combination, multiparametric ultrasound (mpUS), for the detection and localization of PCa by comparison with corresponding histopathology. Methods/design: In this prospective clinical trial, US imaging consisting of GS, SWE and CEUS with quantitative mapping on 3 prostate imaging planes (base, mid and apex) will be performed in 50 patients with biopsy-proven PCa before planned radical prostatectomy using a clinical ultrasound scanner. All US imaging will be evaluated by US readers, scoring the four quadrants of each imaging plane for the likelihood of significant PCa based on a 1 to 5 Likert Scale. Following resection, PCa tumour foci will be identified, graded and attributed to the imaging-derived quadrants in each prostate plane for all prostatectomy specimens. Primary outcome measure will be the sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value and positive predictive value of each US modality and mpUS to detect and localize significant PCa evaluated for different Likert Scale thresholds using receiver operating characteristics curve analyses. Discussion: In the evaluation of new PCa imaging modalities, a structured comparison with gold standard radical prostatectomy specimens is essential as first step. This trial is the first to combine the most promising ultrasound modalities into mpUS. It complies with the IDEAL stage 2b recommendations and will be an important step towards the evaluation of mpUS as a possible option for accurate detection and localization of PCa. Trial registration: The study protocol for multiparametric ultrasound was prospectively registered on Clinicaltrials.gov on 14 March 2017 with the registry name 'Multiparametric Ultrasound-Study for the Detection of Prostate Cancer' and trial registration number NCT03091231

Background: Guidelines advise multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) before repeat biopsy in patients with negative systematic biopsy (SB) and a suspicion of prostate cancer (PCa), enabling MRI targeted biopsy (TB). No consensus exists regarding which of the three available techniques of TB should be preferred. Objective: To compare detection rates of overall PCa and clinically significant PCa (csPCa) for the three MRI-based TB techniques. Design, setting, and participants: Multicenter randomised controlled trial, including 665 men with prior negative SB and a persistent suspicion of PCa, conducted between 2014 and 2017 in two nonacademic teaching hospitals and an academic hospital. Intervention: All patients underwent 3-T mpMRI evaluated with Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PIRADS) version 2. If imaging demonstrated PIRADS ≥3 lesions, patients were randomised 1:1:1 for one TB technique: MRI-transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) fusion TB (FUS-TB), cognitive registration TRUS TB (COG-TB), or in-bore MRI TB (MRI-TB). Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: Primary (overall PCa detection) and secondary (csPCa detection [Gleason score ≥3 + 4]) outcomes were compared using Pearson chi-square test. Results and limitations: On mpMRI, 234/665 (35%) patients had PIRADS ≥3 lesions and underwent TB. There were no significant differences in the detection rates of overall PCa (FUS-TB 49%, COG-TB 44%, MRI-TB 55%, p = 0.4). PCa detection rate differences were −5% between FUS-TB and MRI-TB (p = 0.5, 95% confidence interval [CI] −21% to 11%), 6% between FUS-TB and COG-TB (p = 0.5, 95% CI −10% to 21%), and −11% between COG-TB and MRI-TB (p = 0.17, 95% CI −26% to 5%). There were no significant differences in the detection rates of csPCa (FUS-TB 34%, COG-TB 33%, MRI-TB 33%, p > 0.9). Differences in csPCa detection rates were 2% between FUS-TB and MRI-TB (p = 0.8, 95% CI −13% to 16%), 1% between FUS-TB and COG-TB (p > 0.9, 95% CI −14% to 16%), and 1% between COG-TB and MRI-TB (p > 0.9, 95% CI −14% to 16%). The main study limitation was a low rate of PIRADS ≥3 lesions on mpMRI, causing underpowering for primary outcome. Conclusions: We found no significant differences in the detection rates of (cs)PCa among the three MRI-based TB techniques. Patient summary: In this study, we compared the detection rates of (aggressive) prostate cancer among men with prior negative biopsies and a persistent suspicion of cancer using three different techniques of targeted biopsy based on magnetic resonance imaging. We found no significant differences in the detection rates of (aggressive) prostate cancer among the three techniques. In a repeat biopsy setting, multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI)-based targeted biopsy has a high detection rate of (clinically significant) prostate cancer. There were no significant differences in the detection rates of (clinically significant) prostate cancer among three techniques of mpMRI-based targeted biopsy.

Objective: To demonstrate the frequency of malignancy and histological characteristics of lesions in patients submitted to vacuum-assisted breast biopsy guided by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Materials and Methods: This was a retrospective study of MRI-guided vacuum-assisted breast biopsies performed between April 2008 and December 2016, in which we analyzed clinical and epidemiological data, as well as the BI-RADS classification and histopathological results. We compared nodules and non-nodular enhancements, in terms of their correlation with malignancy, using chi-square test. Results: Among 215 cases referred for MRI-guided vacuum-assisted breast biopsy, the procedure was contraindicated in 10 cases (5%) and was technically feasible in the remaining 205 (95%). Non-nodular enhancements were observed in 135 cases (66%), and nodules were observed in 70 (34%), with a mean diameter of 2.2 cm (range, 0.5-9.6 cm) and 0.97 cm (range, 0.5-2.2 cm), respectively. Of the 205 lesions analyzed, 43 (21%) were malignant, 129 (63%) were benign, and 33 (16%) were classified as high-risk lesions. The most common histological findings were invasive ductal carcinoma and, in high-risk cases, lobular neoplasia. There was no significant difference between nodules and non-nodular enhancements in terms of the rate of malignancy (p = 0.725). Conclusion: In our sample, the overall malignancy rate was 21%. However, to improve the assessment of these results, it is necessary to correlate them with the surgical data and with data from the follow-up of benign cases.