Significance of MRI/Transrectal Ultrasound Fusion Three-Dimensional Model-Guided, Targeted Biopsy Based on Transrectal Ultrasound-Guided Systematic Biopsy in Prostate Cancer Detection: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Switching from the transrectal to the transperineal route: A single center experience

INTRODUCTION

This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility of switching from transrectal to transperineal prostate biopsy (TPPBx) by urologists with no previous experience with TPPBx. Material A monocentric clinical study with exhaustive and consecutive inclusions was conducted between January and November 2021, including 105 consecutive patients who underwent TPPBx performed by two senior urologists with no previous experience of TPPBx (GR, FB). Biopsies were performed under local anesthesia (LA) without antibioprophylaxis. The main objective was to assess the safety of this procedure. Adverse events were classified according to the Clavien-Dindo score. The secondary objectives were to assess the level of pain experienced during the different steps of the procedure using a numerating rating scale (NRS), the rate of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) detected, and the level of anxiety using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HAD).

RESULTS

No major complications (Clavien-Dindo score≥3) were reported. One patient presented with acute urinary retention (1%) and a urinary tract infection (1%). Other adverse events were hematuria (43%), hemospermia (23%), rectal bleeding (1%), perineal hematoma (3%), persistent perineal pain (5%), and de novo erectile dysfunction (2%). The median level of pain on NRS for the procedure was 2.00 (IQ: 1.00-4.00); it was 3.00 (IQ: 2.00-5.00) during LA and 3.00 (IQ: 2.00-5.00) during punctions. In anxious patients (HAD score>10), the level of pain during the procedure was 2.5 (IQ: 2.00-3.00). Overall, csPCa was detected in 63%.

CONCLUSION

TPPBx under LA without antibioprophylaxis provides few complications, an acceptable pain threshold, and a satisfactorily rate of csPCa detection, even if performed by urologists with no previous experience of TPPBx.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3

Fusion-targeted biopsy significantly improves prostate cancer detection in biopsy-naïve men

OBJECTIVE

The precise diagnosis of prostate cancer (PC) is crucial to avoid underdiagnosis, overdiagnosis, and overtreatment. We aimed to compare clinically significant PC (csPC) detection between MRI/ultrasound fusion-targeted prostate (TBx) compared to systematic biopsy (SBx) in biopsy-naïve Japanese men.

METHODS

We included patients with suspect PC due to elevated PSA level or abnormal digital rectal examination, or both. csPC was defined as International Society Urological Pathology (ISUP) grade group ≥2 (csPC-A) and ISUP grade group ≥3 (csPC-B).

RESULTS

This study included 143 patients. Overall PC detection was 66.4% for SBx and 67.8% for MRI-TBx. MRI-TBx presented a significantly higher rate of csPC detection (csPC-A 67.1% vs. 58.7%, p = 0.04, and csPC-B 49.6% vs. 39.9%, p < 0.001) and significantly lower detection of non-csPC-A (0.6% vs. 6.7%). Importantly, MRI-TBx missed 4.9% (7/143) of csPC-A and only 0.7% (1/143) of csPC-B. On the other hand, SBx alone missed 13.3% (19/143) of csPC-A and 4.2% (6/143) of csPC-B.

CONCLUSION

MRI-TBx significantly outperformed 12-cores SBx for csPC detection and decreased non-csPC detection in biopsy-naive men. Performing MRI-TBx without SBx would have missed some csPC, supporting that MRI-TBx synergizes with SBx to increase csPC detection.

MRI/Transrectal Ultrasound Fusion-Guided Targeted Biopsy and Transrectal Ultrasound-Guided Systematic Biopsy for Diagnosis of Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Purpose

For men suspected of having prostate cancer (PCa), the transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided systematic biopsy (SB) was performed. MRI/TRUS fusion guided-targeted biopsy (MRI-TB) could enhance PCa detection, allowing sampling of sites at higher risk which were not obvious with TRUS alone. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare the detection rates of prostate cancer by MRI-TB or MRI-TB plus SB versus SB, mainly for diagnosis of high-risk PCa.

Methods

A literature Search was performed on PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase databases. We searched from inception of the databases up to January 2021.

Results

A total of 5831 patients from 26 studies were included in the present meta-analysis. Compared to traditional TRUS-guided biopsy, MRI-TB had a significantly higher detection rate of clinically significant PCa (RR=1.27; 95%CI 1.15-1.40; p<0.001) and high-risk PCa (RR=1.41; 95% CI 1.22-1.64; p<0.001), while the detection rate of clinically insignificant PCa was lower (RR=0.65; 95%CI 0.55-0.77; p<0.001). MRI-TB and SB did not significantly differ in the detection of overall prostate cancer (RR=1.04; 95%CI 0.95-1.12; p=0.41). Compared with SB alone, we found that MRI-TB plus SB diagnosed more cases of overall, clinically significant and high-risk PCa (p<0.001).

Conclusion

Compared with systematic protocols, MRI-TB detects more clinically significant and high-risk PCa cases, and fewer clinically insignificant PCa cases. MRI-TB combined with SB enhances PCa detection in contrast with either alone but did not reduce the diagnosis rate of clinically insignificant PCa.

Systematic Review Registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/#searchadvanced, CRD42021218475.

Fusion versus cognitive MRI-guided prostate biopsies in diagnosing clinically significant prostate cancer

Objective:

This study assesses whether fusion or cognitive magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-guided prostate targeted and systematic transperineal biopsies (TPB) increase detection of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa).

Materials and Methods:

A retrospective analysis was completed of patients (2018–2020) undergoing 3-Tesla multiparametric prostate MRI informing targeted (either cognitive or MIM software fusion approach) and systematic TPB. ISUP (International Society of Urological Pathology) grade group ⩾ 2 was considered csPCa.

Results:

A total of 355 cases from 4 urologists were included; 131 were fusion and 224 were cognitive MRI-guided biopsies. Of all csPCa found, 86.8% ( n = 171) of cases were confirmed to be at the MRI-indicated location and 11.6% were found as part of active surveillance. In all, 45.0% of the fusion group were found to have csPCa, compared to 62.05% ( n = 139) in the cognitive group ( p = 0.002). csPCa detection rates varied between urologists (41% to 78%, p < 0.001), so a subgroup analysis was performed on Urologist A; 45.0% of fusion and 41.3% of cognitive biopsies had csPCa ( p = 0.644). Multinomial logistic regression analysis showed that biopsy type, being on active surveillance, number of biopsy cores, iPSA (initial Prostate Specific Antigen) value or PIRADS (Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System) score made no significant difference in whether csPCa was found.

Conclusion:

Cognitive and fusion targeting had similar csPCa detection rates. Further prospective studies would be beneficial to validate these findings.

Level of evidence:

2b (according to Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine)

MRI Screening and MRI/US Fusion-Guided Transperineal Biopsy in Detecting Prostate Cancer

OBJECTIVE

Systematic biopsy plays a vital role in diagnosing prostate cancer, but it can lead to misdiagnoses or undertreatment. Advances in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and its guided targeting technology provide the possibility of improving the use of biopsies. This study aimed to evaluate the performance of MRI screening and MRI/ultrasound (MRI/US) fusion-guided transperineal biopsy in the detection of prostate cancer.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective study on patients with suspected prostate cancer in the Kunshan Hospital Affiliated with Jiangsu University from January 2017 to December 2019. All of the patients underwent MRI examinations, followed by a systematic biopsy (either alone or in combination with MRI/US fusion-guided targeted biopsy, based on MRI-visible lesions). We evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of MRI screening and compared biopsy methods by considering sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve (AUC) values.

RESULTS

A total of 157 patients were enrolled, including 112 patients with MRI-visible lesions and 45 patients without MRI-visible lesions. The cancer detection rate (CDR) was higher in patients with MRI-visible lesions (P < 0.001); however, the serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) indicators were similar (P > 0.05). The AUC of MRI was 0.63, which was superior to the AUC values of ultrasound (AUC = 0.55, P = 0.031) and digital rectal examination (AUC = 0.52, P = 0.041) for screening prostate cancer. Both overall CDR and clinically significant prostate cancer detection rates were improved if we combined systematic biopsy and MRI/US fusion-guided targeted biopsy procedures.

CONCLUSION

Overall, prior MRI screening may serve as a classifier for avoiding the overuse of biopsies. A combination of systematic and MRI/US fusion-guided targeted biopsy procedures offers an optimal regimen for detecting prostate cancer.

Probability of Prostate Cancer Diagnosis following Negative Systematic and Targeted MRI: Transrectal Ultrasound Fusion Biopsy: A Real-Life Observational Study

INTRODUCTION

The risk of occult prostate carcinoma (PCa) after negative multiparametric MRI (mpMRI)-transrectal fusion biopsy (F-Bx) is unknown. To determine the false-negative predictive value, we examined PCa detection after prior negative F-Bx.

METHODS

Between December 2012 and November 2016, 491 patients with suspected PCa and suspicious mpMRI findings underwent transrectal F-Bx. Patients with benign pathology (n = 191) were eligible for our follow-up (FU) survey. Patient characteristics and clinical parameters were correlated to subsequent findings of newly detected PCa.

RESULTS

Complete FU with a median of 31 (interquartile range: 17-39) months was available for 176/191 (92.2%) patients. Of those, 54 men had either surgical interventions on the prostate or re-Bxs. Newly detected PCa was evident in 14/176 (7.95%) patients stratified to ISUP ≤2 in 10 and ≥3 in 4 cases. The comparison of patients with newly detected PCa to those without cancerous findings in FU showed significant differences in prostate-specific antigen (PSA) density (0.16 vs. 0.13 ng/mL2) and prostate volume (45 vs. 67 mL, both p < 0.05). Both factors are significant predictors for newly detected cancer after initial negative F-Bx.

CONCLUSION

Only PSA density (>0.13 ng/mL2) and small prostate volume are significant predictors for newly detected PCa after initial negative F-Bx. Despite negative mpMRI/TRUS F-Bx results, patients should be further monitored due to a risk of developing PCa over time. Notwithstanding the limitation of our study that not all patients underwent another Bx, we assume that the false-negative rate is low but existing. Our data represent a real-world scenario.

Optimizing biopsy strategy for prostate cancer: Bayesian framework of network meta-analysis and hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic model for diagnostic accuracy

Overdiagnosis and overtreatment are well known problems in prostate cancer (PCa). The transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) Guided biopsy (GB) as a current gold standard investigation has a low positive detection rate resulting in unnecessary biopsies. The choice of optimal biopsy strategy needs to be defined. Therefore, we undertook a Bayesian network meta analysis (NMA) and Bayesian prediction in the hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic (HSROC) model to present a method for optimizing biopsy strategy in PCa. Twenty eight relevant studies were retrieved through online databases of EMBASE, MEDLINE, and CENTRAL up to February 2020. Markov chain Monte Carlo simulation and Surface Under the Cumulative RAnking curve were used to calculate the rank probability using odds ratio with 95% credible interval. HSROC model was used to formulate the predicted true sensitivity and specificity of each biopsy strategy. Six different PCa biopsy strategies including transrectal ultrasound GB (TRUS GB), fusion GB (FUS GB), fusion + transrectal ultrasound GB (FUS + TRUS GB), magnetic resonance imaging GB (MRI GB), transperineal ultrasound GB (TPUS GB), and contrast enhanced ultrasound GB were analyzed in this study with a total of 7584 patients. These strategies were analyzed on five outcomes including detection rate of overall PCa, clinically significant PCa, insignificant PCa, complication rate, and HSROC. The rank probability showed that the overall PCa detection rate was higher in FUS + TRUS GB, MRI GB, and FUS GB. In terms of clinically significant PCa detection, FUS + TRUS GB and FUS GB had a relatively higher clinically significant PCa detection rate, whereas TRUS GB had a relatively lower rate for clinically significant PCa detection rate. MRI GB (91% and 81%) and FUS GB (82% and 83%) had the highest predicted true sensitivity and specificity, respectively, whereas TRUS GB (62% and 83%) had a lower predicted true sensitivity and specificity. MRI GB, FUS GB, and FUS + TRUS GB were associated with lower complication rate, whereas TPUS GB and TRUS GB were more associated with higher complication rate. This NMA and HSROC model highlight the important finding that FUS + TRUS GB, FUS GB, and MRI GB were superior compared with other strategies to avoid the overdiagnosis and overtreatment of PCa. FUS GB, MRI GB, and FUS + TRUS GB had lower complication rates. These results may assist in shared decision making between patients, carers, and their surgeons.

Fourteen-Core Systematic Biopsy That Includes Two Anterior Cores in Men With PI-RADS Lesion ≥ 3 is Comparable With Magnetic Resonance Imaging-ultrasound Fusion Biopsy in Detecting Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer: A Single-institution Experience

INTRODUCTION

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-ultrasound fusion targeted prostate biopsy (FB) has been advocated by many experts as a replacement for the standard template biopsy. Herein, we compared pathology results and cancer detection rates of FB with our standard 14-core systematic prostate biopsy (SB) that includes 2 anterior cores.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

One hundred two men with elevated prostate-specific antigen and suspicious lesions on multiparametric MRI, Prostate Imaging Reporting And Data System (PI-RADS) v2 score ≥ 3, underwent FB. Each target lesion was biopsied 3 times; our SB was performed concurrently. Biopsy results were compared for overall and clinically significant (cs), defined as Gleason score ≥ 7, cancer detection.

RESULTS

Fifty-two percent of patients had positive biopsy results, and of those, 44 had cs prostate cancer (PCa). The overall detection rates for FB and SB were 39% and 50%, respectively, and there was no statistical difference in the detection rate of csPCa detection rate (P = .42). Of 17 patients diagnosed with a high-risk PCa, defined as Gleason score ≥ 8, SB identified 15, whereas FB identified 10. Within the SB group, 21 had positive anterior core biopsies, of which 11 were cs.

CONCLUSION

Expanding the standard template prostate biopsies to include 2 anterior horn sampling may be just as effective as FB in men with PI-RADS lesion ≥ 3, thereby mitigating the increased cost associated with FB.

MRI-targeted biopsy versus standard transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

PURPOSE

For men with a suspicion of prostate cancer (PCa), the transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy (TRUS-Bx) was recommended. Multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging (mp-MRI) could be more useful to more accurately selected patients who are with a clinical suspicion of PCa and eligible for biopsy, and avoid a biopsy if the result was negative. In the present study, we compared the MRI-targeted biopsy (MRI-TBx) with TRUS-Bx.

METHODS

We searched the following online database: PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library, and the search was updated to March 2019.

RESULTS

Finally, a total of 8 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comprising 2593 patients were enrolled in the final analysis. MRI-TBx and TRUS-Bx did not significantly differ in overall PCa (RR = 1.30; 95% CI 0.98-1.72; P = 0.067), clinically significant PCa (RR = 1.35; 95% CI 0.98-1.86; P = 0.065), and clinically insignificant PCa (RR = 0.76; 95% CI 0.40-1.46; P = 0.416). While in patients with initial biopsy, MRI-TBx had a significantly higher detection rate of overall PCa (RR = 1.40; 95% CI 1.01-1.94; P = 0.045).

CONCLUSION

In the present study, we found that MRI-TBx potentially benefits the detection of overall and clinically significant PCa compared with TRUS-Bx in patients with a suspicion of PCa. Furthermore, in patients with initial biopsy, MRI-TBx had a significantly higher detection rate of overall PCa and a potentially higher detection rate of clinically significant PCa. While for patients with prior negative biopsy, we did not detect significant differences in overall and clinically significant PCa between two groups. More large and multicenter RCTs are further required.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasound guided fusion biopsy of prostate for cancer detection-Comparing transrectal with transperineal approaches

Targeted biopsy using multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging increases the detection rate of clinically significant prostate cancer (csCaP). In this meta-analysis, we compare the diagnostic accuracy of transrectal (TR) vs transperineal (TP) approaches for MRI-guided software fusion biopsy (FB) in the detection of csCaP. A literature search was performed in PubMed, Cochrane and Embase electronic databases up until July 2019 following the preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis system. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of either approach was evaluated using radical prostatectomy or systematic biopsies with ≥24 biopsy cores to be the reference standard. Fourteen papers with a total of 2002 patients were selected. Seven hundred and sixty-five patients underwent TR FB, while 1,387 underwent TP FB. One hundred and fifty of the patients underwent both TR and TP approaches. Both approaches were similar in terms of sensitivity (TR vs. TP: 0.81 vs 0.80) and specificity (TR vs. TP: 0.99 vs 0.95). In terms of likelihood ratios and diagnostic odds ratio, TR performed better than TP approach. The area under the receiving operator curve for both approaches was similar (0.91 vs 0.88 respectively). However, there was substantial heterogeneity across the studies for both approaches. TP and TR approaches to software-based FB yield similar diagnostic performance for the detection of csCaP. When deciding on the approach, physicians should consider other inherent features of either technique that suit their practice.

Use of transrectal ultrasonography for assessment of the size and location of prostatic carcinoma in dogs

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the use of transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS) for the assessment of prostatic tumors in dogs and to compare results for TRUS with results for other imaging modalities.

ANIMALS

10 client-owned male dogs.

PROCEDURES

Client-owned dogs identified with prostatic carcinoma were enrolled. Fluoroscopy, transabdominal ultrasonography (TAUS), TRUS, and MRI were performed on all dogs. Tumor measurements, urethral penetration (identification of abnormal tissue within the urethral lumen), and tumor extension into the urinary tract were recorded for all imaging modalities. Agreement between results for MRI (considered the criterion-referenced standard) and results for other modalities were compared.

RESULTS

Median body weight of the 10 dogs was 26.3 kg (range, 9.4 to 49.5 kg). No complications were encountered during or after TRUS. Significant moderate to good agreements (intraclass correlation coefficients, 0.60 to 0.86) among TAUS, TRUS, fluoroscopy, and MRI were identified for tumor length and height. Assessments of urethral penetration and tumor extension into the bladder with TRUS did not differ significantly from those made with MRI and were superior in terms of absolute agreement with MRI when compared with those for TAUS.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE

TRUS was successfully and safely used to evaluate prostatic carcinoma in dogs. There was moderate to good agreement with MRI results for tumor height and length measurements, and TRUS was found to be superior to TAUS for some assessments. Transrectal ultrasonography can be considered an adjunctive imaging modality for the performance of prostatic interventional procedures or assessment of response to treatment.

Comparison of prostate cancer detection rates between magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy and transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy according to Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System in patients with PSA ≥4 ng/mL: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Previous studies have investigated magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy (MRI-TBx) on the detection for prostate cancer (PCa). Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS), as a standardized MRI reporting system, has widely been used in the management of PCa. However, basing the PI-RADS score, the comparability between MRI-TBx and transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy (TRUS-Bx) in diagnosing PCa remained inconsistent or even controversial. Thus, this systematic meta-analysis aimed to assess the value of PI-RADS in sifting better prostate biopsy method.

Methods

A meta-analysis including 10 articles was performed. In these included studies, biopsy-naive subjects with concerning PSA levels and/or an abnormal digital rectal examination (DRE) were consecutively enrolled by referral from urologists. All subjects underwent multiparameter MRI (mpMRI) prostate and the results were scored independently by PI-RADS. Subjects with equivocal (PI-RADS 3) and intermediate/high-risk (PI-RADS 4/5) lesions underwent MRI-TBx and followed by TRUS-Bx performed by a urologist. The online databases PubMed, Embase and Web of Science were searched to find all correlated articles until October 1^st, 2019. Data were pooled by odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) to assess the strength of the associations. Subgroup analyses were conducted based on Gleason score.

Results

Overall, 10 studies were included in this meta-analysis from January, 2015 to June, 2019. In the comparison of the detection of MRI-TBx and TRUS-Bx in PCa patients, TRUS-Bx had a significant advantage in overall PCa detection compared with MRI-TBx (OR =0.78, 95% CI: 0.62-0.98) in PI-RADS 3. Basing subgroup analysis of Gleason score (csPCa: Gleason score ≥7; non-csPCa: Gleason score <7), a summary analysis of the detection rate of csPCa showed that no significant difference was found (OR =0.82, 95% CI: 0.58-1.16); Meanwhile, no significant difference in non-csPCa patients was also detected (OR =0.83, 95% CI: 0.53-1.28). In PI-RADS 4 or 5, no significant results were detected between MRI-TBx and TRUS-Bx (OR =0.96, 95% CI: 0.87-1.06) for overall PCa detection. The stratification analyses by Gleason score found that TRUS-Bx had an advantage over MRI-TBx in non-csPCa patients (OR =0.76, 95% CI: 0.60-0.98); However, there was no significant difference in the detection rate of csPCa (OR =1.05, 95% CI: 0.93-1.20).

Conclusions

This meta-analysis indicated that using TRUS-Bx was better than MRI-TBx for the diagnosis of PCa in PI-RADS 3; Besides, TRUS-Bx have an advantage over MRI-TBx in the detection for non-csPCa in PI-RADS 4 or 5. Therefore, PI-RADS could be used as a MRI evaluation system in the selection of prostate biopsy.

Renal mass biopsy: an oncological conundrum

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

We evaluate the reasons that the majority of urologists infrequently biopsy a T1a small renal mass (SRM).

RECENT FINDINGS

The majority of urologists report that a renal mass biopsy will not change their management in patients with a SRM given concerns of safety and efficacy of the biopsy. However, when comparing the safety and efficacy of SRM biopsy with neoplasms in all other major organ systems (all of which require biopsy prior to treatment), renal mass biopsy results are favorable. In addition to being safe and effective, renal mass biopsy should be more cost-effective for the healthcare system. Finally, in properly selected patients, renal mass biopsy can be performed in the urologist's office, thereby further decreasing cost.

SUMMARY

Renal mass biopsy is an essential clinical tool that needs to be incorporated into the decision-making process among patients with a T1a SRM. A biopsy-driven, tissue-specific diagnosis of SRMes should become the standard of care in urology to bring us to parity with standard practice to management of lesions identified in every other organ system.