Impact of the type of ultrasound probe on prostate cancer detection rate and characterization in patients undergoing MRI-targeted prostate biopsies using cognitive fusion

Evaluation of how users interface with holographic augmented reality surgical scenes: Interactive planning MR-Guided prostate biopsies

BACKGROUND

User interfaces play a vital role in the planning and execution of an interventional procedure. The objective of this study is to investigate the effect of using different user interfaces for planning transrectal robot-assisted MR-guided prostate biopsy (MRgPBx) in an augmented reality (AR) environment.

METHOD

End-user studies were conducted by simulating an MRgPBx system with end- and side-firing modes. The information from the system to the operator was rendered on HoloLens as an output interface. Joystick, mouse/keyboard, and holographic menus were used as input interfaces to the system.

RESULTS

The studies indicated that using a joystick improved the interactive capacity and enabled operator to plan MRgPBx in less time. It efficiently captures the operator's commands to manipulate the augmented environment representing the state of MRgPBx system.

CONCLUSIONS

The study demonstrates an alternative to conventional input interfaces to interact and manipulate an AR environment within the context of MRgPBx planning.

Assessment of Needle Tip Deflection During Transrectal Guided Prostate Biopsy: Implications for Targeted Biopsies

OBJECTIVES

To measure needle tip deflection during transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) prostate biopsy and evaluate predictors for needle tip deflection.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Analysis of 568 prostate biopsies obtained from 51 consecutive patients who underwent a standard 12-core TRUS guided prostate biopsy. TRUS guided prostate biopsies were performed using BK flex500, with a side-fire biplane probe. Each biopsy core image was captured and clinical data were recorded prospectively. The angle between the expected trajectory of the needle and actual needle course was measured using the longitudinal view of the captured image. The distance between expected and actual needle tip was calculated. We measured median and interquartile needle tip deflection rate stratified by side and location (apex, midgland, base). Univariable and multivariable linear regressions analysis were performed.

RESULTS

The overall median needle tip deflection was 1.77 mm (IQR 1.35-2.47). Location did not significantly alter needle deflection measurements. On multivariable linear regression analysis, higher prostate volume (B = 0.007 95%, CI 0.004, 0.011; p < 0.001) and the right sided biopsy (B = 0.191 95%, CI 0.047, 0.336; p = 0.010) emerged as predictors of higher needle tip deflection.

CONCLUSIONS

To the best of our knowledge this is the first study to measure needle tip deflection during TRUS guided prostate biopsies. We demonstrated that larger prostate size and biopsy side may affect the accuracy of biopsies. These results may have clinical implication to those performing targeted biopsies.

Transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy for prostate cancer detection: Systematic and/or magnetic-resonance imaging-targeted

INTRODUCTION

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is being more widely used in the detection of prostate cancer (PCa), particularly after an initial negative biopsy. In this study, we compared 12-core systematic biopsy (SYS), MRI-targeted biopsy (TAR), and the association of systematic and MRI-targeted (SYS+TAR) prostate biopsy in patients with previous biopsy and those who were biopsy-naive to evaluate the differences in terms of cancer detection and clinically significant cancer detection between the three modalities.

METHODS

Overall, 203 consecutive patients with suspicion of PCa were analyzed; 48.2% were biopsy-naive and 51.7% had at least one previous negative prostate biopsy. The median age was 66 years, median prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level was 7.9 ng/mL and median prostate volume was 46 mL. 38.9% had SYS, 19.2% TAR only, and 41.8% had SYS+TAR biopsy.

RESULTS

Overall, the PCa detection (PCaDR) was 63%. The SYS+TAR biopsy detected significantly more cancer than SYS and TAR only biopsies (72.9% vs. 56.9% and 53.8% respectively; p=0.03). Detection rate of clinically significant cancer (csPCaDR) was 50.7% overall; 65.8% in the SYS+TAR biopsy vs. 39.2% in the SYS and 48.7% in the TAR groups (p=0.002). In the biopsy-naive group, PCaDR and csPCaDR were significantly higher in the SYS+TAR group than in the SYS and TAR groups (p=0.01). In the repeat biopsy group, PCaDR and csPCaDR were equivalent in the TAR and SYS+TAR groups and higher than in the SYS group (p=0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

TAR biopsy, when added to SYS biopsy, was associated with a higher detection rate of csPCa in biopsy-naive patients when compared to TAR and SYS only biopsies. In patients after previous negative biopsy, detection rates of csPCa were equivalent for SYS+TAR and TAR only biopsies, but higher than SYS.

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?

CONTEXT

The introduction of magnetic resonance imaging-guided biopsies (MRI-GB) has changed the paradigm concerning prostate biopsies. Three techniques of MRI-GB are available: (1) in-bore MRI target biopsy (MRI-TB), (2) MRI-transrectal ultrasound fusion (FUS-TB), and (3) cognitive registration (COG-TB).

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate whether MRI-GB has increased detection rates of (clinically significant) prostate cancer (PCa) compared with transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy (TRUS-GB) in patients at risk for PCa, and which technique of MRI-GB has the highest detection rate of (clinically significant) PCa.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

We performed a literature search in PubMed, Embase, and CENTRAL databases. Studies were evaluated using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 checklist and START recommendations. The initial search identified 2562 studies and 43 were included in the meta-analysis.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Among the included studies 11 used MRI-TB, 17 used FUS-TB, 11 used COG-TB, and four used a combination of techniques. In 34 studies concurrent TRUS-GB was performed. There was no significant difference between MRI-GB (all techniques combined) and TRUS-GB for overall PCa detection (relative risk [RR] 0.97 [0.90-1.07]). MRI-GB had higher detection rates of clinically significant PCa (csPCa) compared with TRUS-GB (RR 1.16 [1.02-1.32]), and a lower yield of insignificant PCa (RR 0.47 [0.35-0.63]). There was a significant advantage (p = 0.02) of MRI-TB compared with COG-TB for overall PCa detection. For overall PCa detection there was no significant advantage of MRI-TB compared with FUS-TB (p=0.13), and neither for FUS-TB compared with COG-TB (p=0.11). For csPCa detection there was no significant advantage of any one technique of MRI-GB. The impact of lesion characteristics such as size and localisation could not be assessed.

CONCLUSIONS

MRI-GB had similar overall PCa detection rates compared with TRUS-GB, increased rates of csPCa, and decreased rates of insignificant PCa. MRI-TB has a superior overall PCa detection compared with COG-TB. FUS-TB and MRI-TB appear to have similar detection rates. Head-to-head comparisons of MRI-GB techniques are limited and are needed to confirm our findings.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Our review shows that magnetic resonance imaging-guided biopsy detects more clinically significant prostate cancer (PCa) and less insignificant PCa compared with systematic biopsy in men at risk for PCa.

Endorectal multiparametric 3-tesla magnetic resonance imaging associated with systematic cognitive biopsies does not increase prostate cancer detection rate: a randomized prospective trial

PURPOSE

To investigate prostate cancer (PC) detection rate, employing endorectal multiparametric 3-tesla magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) driving subsequent cognitive systematic prostatic biopsy (CSPB) versus a homogenous group of patients who did not undergo endorectal MRI.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A series of patients with a first negative biopsy were enrolled in the study. Patients were randomized into two groups: Group A: patients underwent MRI and subsequent CSPB; Group B: patients that did not undergo MRI. Each patient underwent a 13-core sampling. Patients from Group A had four cores more for each MRI suspected lesion. The cancer detection rate was calculated for each group with regard to possible matches or mismatches between MRI evidence and pathological reports.

RESULTS

Two hundred consecutive patients were investigated. Fifty out of 200 (25 %) patients had a diagnosis of PC, 24 in Group A and 26 in Group B. In Group A, 67 patients (67 %) were positive for suspected lesions at the MRI. The mismatch between MRI findings and the CSPB outcome was 61 % with an MRI-driven detection rate of 15 %. Group B detection rate was 26 % with no significant differences versus Group A (P = NS). Patient discomfort was higher in Group A (82 %). The accuracy of CSPB was 41 % with a positive predictive value of 22.3 %. This rate is lower in high-grade cancers (11.9 %). The cost-effectiveness was higher in Group A.

CONCLUSIONS

Prostate cancer detection rate does not improve by CSPB. The accuracy of CSPB was lower in high-grade PC, and a higher cost was found with CSPB.

Accuracy of cognitive MRI-targeted biopsy in hitting prostate cancer-positive regions of interest

PURPOSE

Prostate cancer (PCa) diagnosis relies on clinical suspicion leading to systematic transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy (TRUSGB). Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) allows for targeted biopsy of suspicious areas of the prostate instead of random 12-core biopsy. This method has been shown to be more accurate in detecting significant PCa. However, the precise spatial accuracy of cognitive targeting is unknown.

METHODS

Consecutive patients undergoing mpMRI-targeted TRUSGB with cognitive registration (MRTB-COG) followed by robot-assisted radical prostatectomy were included in the present analysis. The regions of interest (ROIs) involved by the index lesion reported on mpMRI were subsequently targeted by two experienced urologists using the cognitive approach. The 27 ROIs were used as spatial reference. Mapping on radical prostatectomy specimen was used as reference to determine true-positive mpMRI findings. Per core correlation analysis was performed.

RESULTS

Forty patients were included. Overall, 40 index lesions involving 137 ROIs (mean ROIs per index lesion 3.43) were identified on MRI. After correlating these findings with final pathology, 117 ROIs (85 %) were considered as true-positive lesions. A total of 102 biopsy cores directed toward such true-positive ROIs were available for final analysis. Cognitive targeted biopsy hit the target in 82 % of the cases (84/102). The only identified risk factor for missing the target was an anterior situated ROI (p = 0.01).

CONCLUSION

In experienced hands, cognitive MRTB-COG allows for an accuracy of 82 % in hitting the correct target, given that it is a true-positive lesion. Anterior tumors are less likely to be successfully targeted.