scholarly journals Potentials and Limitations of Real-Time Elastography for Prostate Cancer Detection: A Whole-Mount Step Section Analysis

2012 ◽  
Vol 2012 ◽  
pp. 1-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Junker ◽  
Georg Schäfer ◽  
Friedrich Aigner ◽  
Peter Schullian ◽  
Leo Pallwein-Prettner ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Real Time ◽  
Tumor Volume ◽  
Maximum Diameter ◽  
Tissue Elasticity ◽  
Detection Rates ◽  
Gleason Pattern ◽  
Small Cancer ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Whole Mount

Objectives. To evaluate prostate cancer (PCa) detection rates of real-time elastography (RTE) in dependence of tumor size, tumor volume, localization and histological type.Materials and Methods. Thirdy-nine patients with biopsy proven PCa underwent RTE before radical prostatectomy (RPE) to assess prostate tissue elasticity, and hard lesions were considered suspicious for PCa. After RPE, the prostates were prepared as whole-mount step sections and were compared with imaging findings for analyzing PCa detection rates.Results. RTE detected 6/62 cancer lesions with a maximum diameter of 0–5 mm (9.7%), 10/37 with a maximum diameter of 6–10 mm (27%), 24/34 with a maximum diameter of 11–20 20 mm (70.6%), 14/14 with a maximum diameter of >20 mm (100%) and 40/48 with a volume ≥0.2 cm3(83.3%). Regarding cancer lesions with a volume ≥ 0.2 cm³ there was a significant difference in PCa detection rates between Gleason scores with predominant Gleason pattern 3 compared to those with predominant Gleason pattern 4 or 5 (75% versus 100%;P=0.028).Conclusions. RTE is able to detect PCa of significant tumor volume and of predominant Gleason pattern 4 or 5 with high confidence, but is of limited value in the detection of small cancer lesions.

scholarly journals Comparison of Accuracies between Real-Time Nonrigid and Rigid Registration in the MRI–US Fusion Biopsy of the Prostate

Diagnostics ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (8) ◽  
pp. 1481
Author(s):  
Sung Il Hwang ◽  
Hyungwoo Ahn ◽  
Hak Jong Lee ◽  
Sung Kyu Hong ◽  
Seok-Soo Byun ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Real Time ◽  
Prostate Volume ◽  
Volume Measurement ◽  
Nonrigid Registration ◽  
Targeted Biopsy ◽  
Registration Accuracy ◽  
Detection Rates ◽  
Rigid Registration ◽  
Significant Difference

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is increasingly important in the detection and localization of prostate cancer. Regarding suspicious lesions on MRI, a targeted biopsy using MRI fused with ultrasound (US) is widely used. To achieve a successful targeted biopsy, a precise registration between MRI and US is essential. The purpose of our study was to show any decrease in errors using a real-time nonrigid registration technique for prostate biopsy. Nineteen patients with suspected prostate cancer were prospectively enrolled in this study. Registration accuracy was calculated by the measuring distance of corresponding points by rigid and nonrigid registration between MRI and US, and compared for rigid and nonrigid registration methods. Overall cancer detection rates were also evaluated by patient and by core. Prostate volume was measured automatically from MRI and manually from US, and compared to each other. Mean distances between the corresponding points in MRI and US were 5.32 ± 2.61 mm for rigid registration and 2.11 ± 1.37 mm for nonrigid registration (p < 0.05). Cancer was diagnosed in 11 of 19 patients (57.9%), and in 67 of 266 biopsy cores (25.2%). There was no significant difference in prostate-volume measurement between the automatic and manual methods (p = 0.89). In conclusion, nonrigid registration reduces targeting errors.

scholarly journals MRI-directed biopsy for primary detection of prostate cancer in a population of 223 men: MRI In-Bore vs MRI-transrectal ultrasound fusion-targeted techniques

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maurizio Del Monte ◽  
Stefano Cipollari ◽  
Francesco Del Giudice ◽  
Martina Pecoraro ◽  
Marco Bicchetti ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Detection Rate ◽  
Transrectal Ultrasound ◽  
Focal Therapy ◽  
Malignant Cells ◽  
Median Percentage ◽  
Detection Rates ◽  
Biopsy Core ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Chi Squared

Objectives: To compare the detection rates of overall prostate cancer (PCa) and clinically significant PCa (csPCa) and the median percentage of cancer per biopsy core between MRI-guided In-bore and MRI-TRUS fusion-targeted biopsy (TBx). Methods: In this retrospective study, 223 patients who underwent prostate multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) and subsequent MR-directed biopsy were included. For PCa and csPCa detection rate (DR), contingency tables were tested via the Pearson’s chi-squared to explore the variance of the outcome distribution. The percentage of cancer per biopsy core was tested with a two-tailed Mann-Withney test. Results: One hundred and seventeen and 106 patients underwent MRI-TRUS fusion or MRI In-bore TBx, respectively. 402 MRI biopsy targets were identified, of which 206 (51.2%) were biopsied with the MRI-TRUS TBx and 196 (48.8%) with the MRI In-bore TBx technique. Per-patient PCa and csPCa detection rates were 140/223 (62.8%) and 97/223 (43.5%), respectively. PCa-DR was 73/117 (62.4%) and 67/106 (63.2%) for MRI-TRUS and MRI In-Bore TBx (p = 0.9), while csPCa detection rate reached 50/117 (42.7%) and 47/106 (44.3%), respectively (p = 0.81). The median per-patient percentage of malignant tissue within biopsy cores was 50% (IQR: 27–65%) for PCa and 60% (IQR: 35–68%) for csPCa, with a statistically significant difference between the techniques. Conclusion No statistically significant difference in the detection rate of MRI In-bore and MRI-TRUS fusion TBx was found. MRI In-bore TBx showed higher per-core percentage of malignant cells. Advances in knowledge MRI In-bore biopsy might impact risk stratification and patient management considering the higher per-core percentage of malignant cells, especially for patients eligible for active surveillance or focal therapy.

scholarly journals Cancer Detection Rates of Systematic and Targeted Prostate Biopsies after Biparametric MRI

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 ◽  
pp. 1-6
Author(s):  
Maudy C. W. Gayet ◽  
Anouk A. M. A. van der Aa ◽  
Harrie P. Beerlage ◽  
Bart Ph Schrier ◽  
Maaike Gielens ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Cancer Detection ◽  
Prostate Biopsy ◽  
Detection Rates ◽  
Prostate Biopsies ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Significant Pathology ◽  
Study Population ◽  
Clinically Significant ◽  
Control Study

Objective. To compare prostate cancer detection rates (CDRs) and pathology results with targeted prostate biopsy (TB) and systematic prostate biopsy (SB) in biopsy-naive men. Methods. An in-patient control study of 82 men undergoing SB and subsequent TB in case of positive prostate MRI between 2015 and 2017 in the Jeroen Bosch Hospital, the Netherlands. Results. Prostate cancer (PCa) was detected in 54.9% with 70.7% agreement between TB and SB. Significant PCa (Gleason score ≥7) was detected in 24.4%. The CDR with TB and SB was 35.4% and 48.8%, respectively (p=0.052). The CDR of significant prostate cancer with TB and SB was both 20.7%. Clinically significant pathology upgrading occurred in 7.3% by adding TB to SB and 22.0% by adding SB to TB. Conclusions. There is no statistically significant difference between CDRs of SB and TB. Both SB and TB miss significant PCas. Moreover, pathology upgrading occurred more often by adding SB to TB than vice versa. This indicates that the omission of SB in this study population might not be justified.

Real-time tissue elasticity imaging (Elastography) for prostate cancer detection

Urology ◽  
2005 ◽  
Vol 66 (3) ◽  
pp. 3
Author(s):  
M. Tsutsumi ◽  
T. Miyakawa ◽  
S. Ishikawa ◽  
T. Matsumura ◽  
T. Shiina ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Real Time ◽  
Cancer Detection ◽  
Elasticity Imaging ◽  
Tissue Elasticity ◽  
Prostate Cancer Detection ◽  
Tissue Elasticity Imaging

Three-dimensional ultrasound-based spectroscopic imaging for the detection of prostate cancer.

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (5_suppl) ◽  
pp. 234-234
Author(s):  
Hans T. Chung ◽  
Ervis Sofrani ◽  
Naum Papanicolau ◽  
Linda Sugar ◽  
Gerard Morton ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Radical Prostatectomy ◽  
Prostate Gland ◽  
Spectroscopic Imaging ◽  
Radiotherapy Planning ◽  
Ultrasound Images ◽  
Three Dimension ◽  
Detection Rates ◽  
Whole Mount ◽  
Parametric Maps

234 Background: The objective of this translational research was to investigate the use of real-time novel three-dimension, quantitative ultrasound-based spectroscopic imaging of the prostate as a means of cancer detection. Methods: Fourteen patients with T2-3 prostate cancer underwent a 6–9 MHz trans-rectal ultrasound scan of the prostate prior to radical prostatectomy. Equally spaced axial ultrasound images (0.5 cm separation) corresponding elasticity and spectroscopy data were collected in each patient. Colour-coded spectroscopic parametric maps of 0-Mhz intercept (0-Mhz), mid-band fit (MBF) and slope of line of best fit (slope) were generated indicating where the disease in the prostate gland is hypothetically located. Quantitative data (% volume of cancer over the prostate gland) were compared to whole-mount radical prostatectomy histopathology maps to determine the sensitivity and accuracy in parametrically delineating prostate cancer. Results: Representative data indicate spectral changes were associated with the presence of co-incident disease as located on correlative histopathology whole mount sections. Of the 14 patients enrolled, 7 have been analyzed and presented here. The mean % difference between 0-MHz and MBF, with H&E, was 14% (SD 38%) and 21% (SD 24%), respectively. Gross areas of disease were readily visualized in ultrasound parametric maps and corresponded to a maximum 10dB decrease in 0-MHz or MBF. Parametric maps generated from the spectral slope offered no discrimination of disease. There were differences in scatterer size estimates and scatter concentration estimates between putative disease areas and the remaining tissue. Conclusions: Initial results suggest that there is good correlation between spectroscopic maps with disease on whole-mount specimens. This method may ultimately permit ultrasound-guided targeted biopsies to improve detection rates and non-invasive assessment of disease for radiotherapy planning.

Changes in prostate cancer detection rate of fusion versus systematic biopsy over time: A single center experience.

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (6_suppl) ◽  
pp. 15-15
Author(s):  
Brian P. Calio ◽  
Abhinav Sidana ◽  
Dordaneh Sugano ◽  
Amit L Jain ◽  
Mahir Maruf ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Cancer Detection ◽  
Learning Curves ◽  
Low Risk ◽  
Fusion Biopsy ◽  
Detection Rates ◽  
Single Center Experience ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Clinically Significant ◽  
Systematic Biopsy

15 Background: To determine the effect of learning curves and changes in fusion platform during 9 years of NCI’s experience with multiparametric MRI (mpMRI)/TRUS fusion biopsy. Methods: A review was performed of a prospectively maintained database of patients undergoing mpMRI followed by fusion biopsy (Fbx) and systematic biopsy (Sbx) from 2007−2016. The patients were stratified based on the timing of first biopsy in 3 groups. Cohort 1 included patients biopsied between 7/2007−12/2010, accounting for learning curve at our institution. Cohort 2 included patients biopsied from 1/2011 up to the debut of UroNav (Invivo) platform in 5/2013. Cohort 3 included patients biopsied after 5/2013. Clinically significant (CS) disease was defined as Gleason 7 (3+4) or higher. Cancer detection rates (CDR) between Sbx and Fbx during different time periods were compared using McNemar’s test. Age and PSA standardized CDRs were calculated for comparison between 3 cohorts. Results: 1528 patients were included in the study with 219, 549 and 761 patients included in 3 respective cohorts. Mean age, PSA and race distribution were similar across 3 cohorts. In cohort 1 there was no significant difference between CDR of CS disease by Fbx (24.7%) vs Sbx (21.5%), p = 0.377. Fbx was significantly better than Sbx in detection of CS disease in cohort 2 and cohort 3 (31.5% vs 25.3%, p = 0.001; 36.5% vs 30.2%, p < 0.001, respectively). There was significant decline in detection of low risk disease by Fbx compared to Sbx in the same period (cohort 2: 14.2% vs 20.9%, p < 0.001; cohort 3: 12.5% vs 19.5%, p < 0.001). Age and PSA standardized CDR of CS cancer by Fbx increased significantly between each successive cohort (cohort 1 and 2: 5.2%, 95% CI [2.1-8.5]), 2 and 3 (5.2%, 95% CI [1.8-8.6]). Conclusions: Our results show that after an early learning period using Fbx, CS prostate cancer was detected at significantly higher rates with Fbx than with Sbx, and low risk disease was detected at lower rates. Advances in software allowed for even greater detection of CS disease in the last cohort. This study shows that accuracy of Fbx is dependent on multiple factors; surgeon/radiologist experience and software improvements together produce improved accuracy.

scholarly journals 3D versus 2D Systematic Transrectal Ultrasound-Guided Prostate Biopsy: Higher Cancer Detection Rate in Clinical Practice

2013 ◽  
Vol 2013 ◽  
pp. 1-5 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexandre Peltier ◽  
Fouad Aoun ◽  
Fouad El-Khoury ◽  
Eric Hawaux ◽  
Ksenija Limani ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Cancer Detection ◽  
Prostate Biopsy ◽  
Detection Rate ◽  
Transrectal Ultrasound ◽  
Daily Practice ◽  
Cancer Detection Rate ◽  
Prior History ◽  
Detection Rates ◽  
Significant Difference

Objectives. To compare prostate cancer detection rates of extended 2D versus 3D biopsies and to further assess the clinical impact of this method in day-to-day practice.Methods. We analyzed the data of a cohort of 220 consecutive patients with no prior history of prostate cancer who underwent an initial prostate biopsy in daily practice due to an abnormal PSA and/or DRE using, respectively, the classical 2D and the new 3D systems. All the biopsies were done by a single experienced operator using the same standardized protocol.Results. There was no significant difference in terms of age, total PSA, or prostate volume between the two groups. However, cancer detection rate was significantly higher using the 3D versus the 2D system, 50% versus 34% (P<0.05). There was no statistically significant difference while comparing the 2 groups in term of nonsignificant cancer detection.Conclusion. There is reasonable evidence demonstrating the superiority of the 3D-guided biopsies in detecting prostate cancers that would have been missed using the 2D extended protocol.

Prediction of Significant Prostate Cancer at Prostate Biopsy and Per Core Detection Rate of Targeted and Systematic Biopsies Using Real-Time Shear Wave Elastography

2015 ◽  
Vol 95 (2) ◽  
pp. 189-196 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katharina Boehm ◽  
Lars Budäus ◽  
Pierre Tennstedt ◽  
Burkhard Beyer ◽  
Jonas Schiffmann ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Shear Wave ◽  
Prostate Biopsy ◽  
Predictive Accuracy ◽  
Specific Antigen ◽  
Shear Wave Elastography ◽  
Study Cohort ◽  
Detection Rates ◽  
Gleason Pattern ◽  
Targeted Biopsies

Introduction: Prostate cancer (PCa) detection is accompanied by overdiagnosis and mischaracterization of PCa. Therefore, new imaging modalities like shear wave elastography (SWE) are required. Aim: The aim of this study was to evaluate per-core detection rates (DRs) of targeted biopsies and systematic biopsies and to test if SWE findings can predict presence of clinically significant PCa (csPCa) at biopsy. Patients and Methods: Overall, 95 patients scheduled for prostate biopsy in our center underwent SWE. SWE findings were classified into suspicious or normal. Targeted biopsies were taken in up to 3 SWE-suspicious areas. csPCa was defined as the presence of Gleason pattern ≥4, level of prostate-specific antigen ≥10 ng/ml or >2 positive cores. Results: Overall DR for csPCa in our study cohort was 40%. Per-core DR for exclusively SWE-targeted cores versus systematic samples cores was 10.5 vs. 8.6% (p = 0.3). In the logistic regression models, individuals with suspicious SWE findings are at 6.4-fold higher risk of harboring csPCa (p = 0.03). Gain in predictive accuracy was 2.3% (0.82 vs. 0.84, p = 0.01). Conclusions: Presence of suspicious SWE findings is an independent predictor of csPCa. Therefore, SWE may be helpful in selecting patients for biopsy. Nonetheless, per-core DR for SWE-targeted cores was not statistically significant higher than DR of systematic sampled cores. Therefore, additional systematic biopsy is mandatory.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document