Image-guided prostate biopsy using magnetic resonance imaging-derived targets: a systematic review
- PMID: 22743165
- DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2012.06.004
Image-guided prostate biopsy using magnetic resonance imaging-derived targets: a systematic review
Abstract
Context: Technical improvements in prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) have resulted in the use of MRI to target prostate biopsies.
Objective: To systematically review the literature to compare the accuracy of MRI-targeted biopsy with standard transrectal biopsy in the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer.
Evidence acquisition: The PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched from inception until December 3, 2011, using the search criteria 'prostate OR prostate cancer' AND 'magnetic resonance imaging OR MRI' AND 'biopsy OR target'. Four reviewers independently assessed 4222 records; 222 records required full review. Fifty unique records (corresponding to 16 discrete patient populations) directly compared an MRI-targeted with a standard transrectal approach.
Evidence synthesis: Evidence synthesis was used to address specific questions. Where MRI was applied to all biopsy-naive men, 62% (374 of 599) had MRI abnormalities. When subjected to a targeted biopsy, 66% (248 of 374) had prostate cancer detected. Both targeted and standard biopsy detected clinically significant cancer in 43% (236 or 237 of 555, respectively). Missed clinically significant cancers occurred in 13 men using targeted biopsy and 12 using a standard approach. Targeted biopsy was more efficient. A third fewer men were biopsied overall. Those who had biopsy required a mean of 3.8 targeted cores compared with 12 standard cores. A targeted approach avoided the diagnosis of clinically insignificant cancer in 53 of 555 (10%) of the presenting population.
Conclusions: MRI-guided biopsy detects clinically significant prostate cancer in an equivalent number of men versus standard biopsy. This is achieved using fewer biopsies in fewer men, with a reduction in the diagnosis of clinically insignificant cancer. Variability in study methodology limits the strength of recommendation that can be made. There is a need for a robust multicentre trial of targeted biopsies.
Copyright © 2012 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Comment in
-
Magnetic resonance imaging-targeted prostate biopsy: back to the future.Eur Urol. 2013 Jan;63(1):141-2; discussion 143-4. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2012.06.049. Epub 2012 Jul 4. Eur Urol. 2013. PMID: 22790287 No abstract available.
Similar articles
-
Head-to-head Comparison of Transrectal Ultrasound-guided Prostate Biopsy Versus Multiparametric Prostate Resonance Imaging with Subsequent Magnetic Resonance-guided Biopsy in Biopsy-naïve Men with Elevated Prostate-specific Antigen: A Large Prospective Multicenter Clinical Study.Eur Urol. 2019 Apr;75(4):570-578. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2018.11.023. Epub 2018 Nov 23. Eur Urol. 2019. PMID: 30477981
-
Detection of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer Using Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Ultrasound Fusion Targeted Biopsy: A Systematic Review.Eur Urol. 2015 Jul;68(1):8-19. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2014.10.026. Epub 2014 Nov 1. Eur Urol. 2015. PMID: 25454618 Review.
-
Prebiopsy Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Prostate Cancer Diagnosis in Biopsy-naive Men with Suspected Prostate Cancer Based on Elevated Prostate-specific Antigen Values: Results from a Randomized Prospective Blinded Controlled Trial.Eur Urol. 2016 Mar;69(3):419-25. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2015.05.024. Epub 2015 May 29. Eur Urol. 2016. PMID: 26033153 Clinical Trial.
-
Prospective randomized trial comparing magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-guided in-bore biopsy to MRI-ultrasound fusion and transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy in patients with prior negative biopsies.Eur Urol. 2015 Oct;68(4):713-20. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2015.06.008. Epub 2015 Jun 23. Eur Urol. 2015. PMID: 26116294 Clinical Trial.
-
Comparing Three Different Techniques for Magnetic Resonance Imaging-targeted Prostate Biopsies: A Systematic Review of In-bore versus Magnetic Resonance Imaging-transrectal Ultrasound fusion versus Cognitive Registration. Is There a Preferred Technique?Eur Urol. 2017 Apr;71(4):517-531. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2016.07.041. Epub 2016 Aug 25. Eur Urol. 2017. PMID: 27568655 Review.
Cited by
-
Detection of anterior prostate cancer using a magnetic resonance imaging-transrectal ultrasound fusion biopsy in cases with initial biopsy and history of systematic biopsies.Prostate Int. 2023 Dec;11(4):212-217. doi: 10.1016/j.prnil.2023.08.002. Epub 2023 Aug 31. Prostate Int. 2023. PMID: 38196555 Free PMC article.
-
Hospital encounters and associated costs of prostate evaluation for clinically important disease MRI vs. standard evaluation procedures (PRECISE) study from a provincial-payer perspective.Can Urol Assoc J. 2023 Aug;17(8):280-284. doi: 10.5489/cuaj.8197. Can Urol Assoc J. 2023. PMID: 37581543 Free PMC article.
-
How many cores should be taken from each region of interest when performing a targeted transrectal prostate biopsy?Prostate Int. 2023 Jun;11(2):122-126. doi: 10.1016/j.prnil.2023.01.003. Epub 2023 Jan 14. Prostate Int. 2023. PMID: 37409093 Free PMC article.
-
Comparing 12-core and 20-core biopsy for prostate cancer diagnosis with transperineal MR/US fusion biopsy: assessing the effective number of systemic cores using propensity score matching.Int Urol Nephrol. 2023 Oct;55(10):2465-2471. doi: 10.1007/s11255-023-03674-2. Epub 2023 Jun 20. Int Urol Nephrol. 2023. PMID: 37340208 Free PMC article.
-
Assessment of prostate cancer progression using a translational needle photoacoustic sensing probe: Preliminary study with intact human prostates ex-vivo.Photoacoustics. 2022 Oct 28;28:100418. doi: 10.1016/j.pacs.2022.100418. eCollection 2022 Dec. Photoacoustics. 2022. PMID: 36386297 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical
Miscellaneous
