Use of 29-MHz Micro-ultrasound for Local Staging of Prostate Cancer in Patients Scheduled for Radical Prostatectomy: A Feasibility Study

Saline-assisted fascial exposure (SAFE) technique to improve nerve-sparing in robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy

OBJECTIVE

To provide a summary of our initial experience and assess the impact of the Saline-Assisted Fascial Exposure (SAFE) technique on erectile function (EF), urinary continence, and oncological outcomes after Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy (RALP).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

From January 2021 to July 2022, we included patients with a baseline Sexual Health Inventory for Men (SHIM) score of ≥17 and a high probability of extracapsular extension (ECE), ranging from 21% to 73%, as per the Martini et al. nomogram. A propensity score matching was carried out at a ratio of 1:2 between patients who underwent RALP + SAFE (33) and RALP alone (66). The descriptive statistical analysis is presented. The SAFE technique was performed using two approaches, transrectal guided by micro-ultrasound or transperitoneal. Its principle entails a low-pressure injection of saline solution in the periprostatic fascia to achieve an atraumatic dissection of the neural hammock. Potency was defined as a SHIM score of ≥17 and continence as no pads per day.

RESULTS

At follow-up intervals of 6, 13, 26, and 52 weeks, the SHIM score differed significantly between the two groups, favouring the RALP + SAFE (P = 0.01, P < 0.001, P < 0.001, and P = 0.01, respectively). These results remained significant when the mean SHIM score was assessed. As shown by the cumulative incidence curve, EF rates were higher in the RALP + SAFE compared to the RALP alone group (log-rank P < 0.001). The baseline SHIM and use of the SAFE technique were independent predictors of EF recovery.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of the SAFE technique led to better SHIM scores at 6, 13, 26, and 52 weeks after RALP in patients at high risk of ECE who underwent a partial NS procedure.

Prostate Cancer Diagnosis with Micro-ultrasound: What We Know now and New Horizons

Prostate cancer (PCa) is the most common non-cutaneous cancer diagnosed in males. Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging (mpMRI) with targeted biopsy can detect PCa and is currently the recommended initial test in men at risk for PCa. Micro-Ultrasound (MicroUS) is a novel high-resolution 29-MHz ultrasound with ∼three times greater resolution of conventional transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) resolution. Preliminary data suggest improved accuracy of ultrasound for targeted prostate biopsy. A growing body of evidence has become available supporting MicroUS as a potentially time and cost saving modality for PCa detection, with early results suggesting comparable accuracy to mpMRI. Additionally, microUS allows real-time visualization for accurate targeted biopsy. It is not yet clear whether MicroUS should be used on its own or in combination with mpMRI for prostate cancer detection. The ongoing OPTIMUM randomized controlled trial will help to establish the role of MicroUS in the diagnostic algorithm for the detection of clinically significant (cs)-PCa. Early data also indicate this imaging modality may have a role in local staging (eg, extracapsular extension prediction) and active surveillance of PCa. MicroUS has also the potential to add value to biparametric (bp) MRI, and may represent a promising tool for guidance of focal therapy in the near future.

Micro-ultrasound-guided biopsies versus systematic biopsies in the detection of prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

The diagnosis of prostate cancer (PCa) still relies on the performance of both targeted (TB) and systematic biopsies (SB). Micro-ultrasound (mUS)-guided biopsies demonstrated a high sensitivity in detecting clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa), which could be comparable to that of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-TB, but their added value has not been compared to SB yet.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis, based on Medline, EMBASE, Scopus, and Web of Science, in accordance with PRISMA guidelines, to compare mUS-guided biopsies to SB.

RESULTS

Based on the literature search of 2957 articles, 15 met the inclusion criteria (2967 patients). Most patients underwent mUS-guided biopsies, followed by MRI-TB and SB. Respectively 5 (n = 670) and 4 (n = 467) studies, providing raw data on SB, were included in a random-effect meta-analysis of the detection rate of csPCa, i.e. Gleason Grade Group (GGG) ≥ 2 or non-csPCa (GGG = 1). Overall, PCa was detected in 56-71% of men, with 31.3-49% having csPCa and 17-25.4% having non-csPCa. Regarding csPCa, mUS-guided biopsies identified 196 and SB 169 cases (Detection Ratio (DR): 1.18, 95% CI 0.83-1.68, I2 = 69%), favoring mUS-guided biopsies; regarding non-csPCa, mUS-guided biopsies identified 62 and SB 115 cases (DR: 0.55, 95% CI 0.41-0.73, I2 = 0%), also favoring mUS-guided biopsies by decreasing unnecessary diagnosis.

CONCLUSION

Micro-ultrasound-guided biopsies compared favorably with SB for the detection of csPCa and detected fewer non-csPCa than SB. Prospective trials are awaited to confirm the interest of adding mUS-guided biopsies to MRI-TB to optimize csPCa detection without increasing overdiagnosis of non-csPCa.

Micro-Ultrasound: Current Role in Prostate Cancer Diagnosis and Future Possibilities

Prostate Cancer (PCa) is the second most common cancer in men. Population screening using prostate specific antigen (PSA) blood test and digital rectal exam (DRE) is recommended by the NCCN, EAU and other prominent clinical guidelines. While MRI is the recommended initial test in men at risk for PCa, micro-Ultrasound (MicroUS) is a novel high resolution ultrasound technology that has shown promise in PCa detection. This article provides a narrative review of the studies to date which have been conducted to evaluate the functionality and efficacy of MicroUS within the patient care pathway for prostate cancer. A total of 13 relevant publications comparing detection of csPCa between MicroUS and mpMRI were selected. An amount of 4 publications referring to use of MicroUS for other indications were found. Each publication was evaluated for risk of bias and applicability using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy (QUADAS-2) tool. The studies reviewed conclude that MicroUS detection rates for clinically significant prostate cancer diagnosis are comparable to the detection rates of mpMRI guided biopsy procedures. While the existing literature indicates that MicroUS should replace conventional TRUS for prostate imaging and biopsy, it is not yet clear whether MicroUS should be used on its own or in conjunction with mpMRI for augmenting prostate cancer detection. The ongoing OPTIMUM trial will provide evidence on how best to utilize this new technology. Early data also suggest this flexible new imaging modality has a place in local staging and active surveillance of prostate cancer as well as in bladder cancer staging.

Side-specific, Microultrasound-based Nomogram for the Prediction of Extracapsular Extension in Prostate Cancer

Background

Prediction of extracapsular extension (ECE) is essential to achieve a balance between oncologic resection and neural tissue preservation. Microultrasound (MUS) is an attractive alternative to multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) in the staging scenario.

Objective

To create a side-specific nomogram integrating clinicopathologic parameters and MUS findings to predict ipsilateral ECE and guide nerve sparing.

Design setting and participants

Prospective data were collected from consecutive patients who underwent robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy from June 2021 to May 2022 and had preoperative MUS and mpMRI. A total of 391 patients and 612 lobes were included in the analysis.

Outcome measurements and statistical analysis

ECE on surgical pathology was the primary outcome. Multivariate regression analyses were carried out to identify predictors for ECE. The resultant multivariable model's performance was visualized using the receiver-operating characteristic curve. A nomogram was developed based on the coefficients of the logit function for the MUS-based model. A decision curve analysis (DCA) was performed to assess clinical utility.

Results and limitations

The areas under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUCs) of the MUS-based model were 81.4% and 80.9% (95% confidence interval [CI] 75.6, 84.6) after internal validation. The AUC of the mpMRI-model was also 80.9% (95% CI 77.2, 85.7). The DCA demonstrated the net clinical benefit of the MUS-based nomogram and its superiority compared with MUS and MRI alone for detecting ECE. Limitations of our study included its sample size and moderate inter-reader agreement.

Conclusions

We developed a side-specific nomogram to predict ECE based on clinicopathologic variables and MUS findings. Its performance was comparable with that of a mpMRI-based model. External validation and prospective trials are required to corroborate our results.

Patient summary

The integration of clinical parameters and microultrasound can predict extracapsular extension with similar results to models based on magnetic resonance imaging findings. This can be useful for tailoring the preservation of nerves during surgery.

Detection of clinically significant index prostate cancer using micro-ultrasound: correlation with radical prostatectomy

OBJECTIVE

To determine the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) index lesion using high resolution transrectal micro-ultrasound (MicroUS) applying PRI-MUS (Prostate Risk Identification using Micro Ultrasound) score v1.0.

METHODS

Men who underwent radical prostatectomy following biopsy and MicroUS assessment were included. MicroUS dynamic cine loops of these patients were retrospectively reviewed by an experienced radiologist. The radiologist was aware that patients had undergone radical prostatectomy but was blinded to pathological data. Suspicious sites were assigned a PRI-MUS score. Radical prostatectomy specimens were examined with quarter mount technique. Detection rate of csPCa index lesion [Grade Group (GG) ≥2] by MicroUS was assessed at a patient level.

RESULTS

Twenty-five participants were included in the analysis. The median age was 65.5 years (range 56 - 74). Median PSA was 6.45 ng/dL (range 2 - 31.72). Two of 25 patients did not have csPCa (GG1 disease) on radical prostatectomy. MicroUS visualized 20/23 (87%) of the csPCa index lesions [median length 9 mm (range 1.5- 28.5)]. All identified lesions were categorized PRIMUS score 4 or 5. The 3 missed index lesions were in the transition zone [median length 10.5 mm (range 4.5-22.5)]. MicroUS missed 11 non index csPCa in 9 participants [median length 1.5 mm (range 1.5-10.5)]. Of these, 8 were GG2, two GG3 and one GG5. MicroUS identified the csPCa index lesion in all 9 of these men.

CONCLUSION

MicroUS showed high sensitivity (87%) in detecting index lesions in the prostate gland and identified 100% of index lesions in the peripheral zone.

Use of high-resolution micro-ultrasound to predict extraprostatic extension of prostate cancer prior to surgery: a prospective single-institutional study

PURPOSE

We aim to evaluate the accuracy of micro-ultrasound (microUS) in predicting extraprostatic extension (EPE) of Prostate Cancer (PCa) prior to surgery.

METHODS

Patients with biopsy-proven PCa scheduled for robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) were prospectively recruited. The following MRI-derived microUS features were evaluated: capsular bulging, visible breach of the prostate capsule (visible extracapsular extension; ECE), presence of hypoechoic halo, and obliteration of the vesicle-prostatic angle. The ability of each feature to predict EPE was determined.

RESULTS

Overall, data from 140 patients were examined. All predictors were associated with non-organ-confined disease (p < 0.001). Final pathology showed that 79 patients (56.4%) had a pT2 disease and 61 (43.3%) ≥ pT3. Rate of non-organ-confined disease increased from 44% in those individuals with only 1 predictor (OR 7.71) to 92.3% in those where 4 predictors (OR 72.00) were simultaneously observed. The multivariate logistic regression model including clinical parameters showed an area under the curve (AUC) of 82.3% as compared to an AUC of 87.6% for the model including both clinical and microUS parameters. Presence of ECE at microUS predicted EPE with a sensitivity of 72.1% and a specificity of 88%, a negative predictive value of 80.5% and positive predictive value of 83.0%, with an AUC of 80.4%.

CONCLUSIONS

MicroUS can accurately predict EPE at the final pathology report in patients scheduled for RARP.

Micro-Ultrasound: a way to bring imaging for prostate cancer back to urology

Only a decade ago, there were insufficient imaging options for the detection and local staging of prostate cancer. However, the introduction of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) has advanced a much-needed tool for this scope of application. The possibilities and limitations of mpMRI have been well studied. Imaging must be acquired and evaluated using a standardized protocol (the latest version of Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System). Sensitivity has been shown to increase with higher grades and larger tumors, and while the detection rate on a per patient basis is relatively high, the per-lesion detection rate is far inferior. Various specialists have attempted to elevate the use of transrectal ultrasound, a tool frequently used by all urologists. Encouragement for this idea comes from a recently introduced system of high frequency transrectal ultrasound. The level of evidence supporting its use in the detection and staging of prostate cancer is not comparable with mpMRI yet, but initial prospective studies indicate good potential. The sensitivity of micro-ultrasound and mpMRI for clinically significant prostate cancer ranges from 94% to 100% and from 88% to 90%, respectively. Further areas of application, such as local staging for prostate and bladder cancer, are currently being evaluated. In summary, microultrasound presents a promising technology for further improving urological imaging and allows for the possibility of returning prostate cancer imaging to urologists. This review will summarize the current scientific basis for the use of micro-ultrasound in the detection of prostate cancer.