Comparative Effectiveness of Targeted Prostate Biopsy Using Magnetic Resonance Imaging Ultrasound Fusion Software and Visual Targeting: a Prospective Study.

J Urol 2016 Sep 30;196(3):697-702. Epub 2016 Mar 30.

Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York; Health Outcomes Group, Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York. Electronic address:

Purpose: We compared the diagnostic outcomes of magnetic resonance-ultrasound fusion and visually targeted biopsy for targeting regions of interest on prostate multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging.

Materials And Methods: Patients presenting for prostate biopsy with regions of interest on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging underwent magnetic resonance imaging targeted biopsy. For each region of interest 2 visually targeted cores were obtained, followed by 2 cores using a magnetic resonance-ultrasound fusion device. Our primary end point was the difference in the detection of high grade (Gleason 7 or greater) and any grade cancer between visually targeted and magnetic resonance-ultrasound fusion, investigated using McNemar's method. Secondary end points were the difference in detection rate by biopsy location using a logistic regression model and the difference in median cancer length using the Wilcoxon signed rank test.

Results: We identified 396 regions of interest in 286 men. The difference in the detection of high grade cancer between magnetic resonance-ultrasound fusion biopsy and visually targeted biopsy was -1.4% (95% CI -6.4 to 3.6, p=0.6) and for any grade cancer the difference was 3.5% (95% CI -1.9 to 8.9, p=0.2). Median cancer length detected by magnetic resonance-ultrasound fusion and visually targeted biopsy was 5.5 vs 5.8 mm, respectively (p=0.8). Magnetic resonance-ultrasound fusion biopsy detected 15% more cancers in the transition zone (p=0.046) and visually targeted biopsy detected 11% more high grade cancer at the prostate base (p=0.005). Only 52% of all high grade cancers were detected by both techniques.

Conclusions: We found no evidence of a significant difference in the detection of high grade or any grade cancer between visually targeted and magnetic resonance-ultrasound fusion biopsy. However, the performance of each technique varied in specific biopsy locations and the outcomes of both techniques were complementary. Combining visually targeted biopsy and magnetic resonance-ultrasound fusion biopsy may optimize the detection of prostate cancer.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2016.03.149DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5014662PMC
September 2016
22 Reads

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

magnetic resonance-ultrasound
32
resonance-ultrasound fusion
32
visually targeted
32
targeted biopsy
24
grade cancer
20
high grade
20
difference detection
16
fusion biopsy
16
magnetic resonance
16
biopsy
14
regions interest
12
detection high
12
resonance imaging
12
magnetic
12
targeted
10
fusion
9
median cancer
8
resonance-ultrasound
8
cancer length
8
multiparametric magnetic
8

Similar Publications