The Current State of MR Imaging-targeted Biopsy Techniques for Detection of Prostate Cancer.

Systematic transrectal ultrasonography (US)-guided biopsy is the standard approach for histopathologic diagnosis of prostate cancer. However, this technique has multiple limitations because of its inability to accurately visualize and target prostate lesions. Multiparametric magnetic resonance (MR) imaging of the prostate is more reliably able to localize significant prostate cancer. Targeted prostate biopsy by using MR imaging may thus help to reduce false-negative results and improve risk assessment. Several commercial devices are now available for targeted prostate biopsy, including in-gantry MR imaging-targeted biopsy and real-time transrectal US-MR imaging fusion biopsy systems. This article reviews the current status of MR imaging-targeted biopsy platforms, including technical considerations, as well as advantages and challenges of each technique. © RSNA, 2017.

[1]  A. D'Amico,et al.  Transperineal magnetic resonance image guided prostate biopsy. , 2000, The Journal of urology.

[2]  T. Stamey,et al.  Relationship between systematic biopsies and histological features of 222 radical prostatectomy specimens: lack of prediction of tumor significance for men with nonpalpable prostate cancer. , 2001, The Journal of urology.

[3]  A. D'Amico,et al.  MR imaging-guided prostate biopsy with surgical navigation software: device validation and feasibility. , 2001, Radiology.

[4]  Michael W Kattan,et al.  Prostate cancer: detection of extracapsular extension by genitourinary and general body radiologists at MR imaging. , 2004, Radiology.

[5]  S. Zangos,et al.  MR-guided transgluteal biopsies with an open low-field system in patients with clinically suspected prostate cancer: technique and preliminary results , 2004, European Radiology.

[6]  D. Beyersdorff,et al.  MR imaging-guided prostate biopsy with a closed MR unit at 1.5 T: initial results. , 2005, Radiology.

[7]  Heinz-Peter Schlemmer,et al.  MRI-guided biopsy of the prostate increases diagnostic performance in men with elevated or increasing PSA levels after previous negative TRUS biopsies. , 2006, European urology.

[8]  Bob Djavan,et al.  Biopsy standards for detection of prostate cancer , 2007, World Journal of Urology.

[9]  P. Choyke,et al.  Real-time MRI-TRUS fusion for guidance of targeted prostate biopsies , 2008, Computer aided surgery : official journal of the International Society for Computer Aided Surgery.

[10]  R. Paterson,et al.  Bacterial sepsis after prostate biopsy--a new perspective. , 2009, Urology.

[11]  D. Stoianovici,et al.  Robotic image-guided needle interventions of the prostate. , 2009, Reviews in urology.

[12]  Roberto Passariello,et al.  Value of Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy Imaging and Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Imaging for Detecting Prostate Cancer Foci in Men With Prior Negative Biopsy , 2010, Clinical Cancer Research.

[13]  Thomas Hambrock,et al.  Magnetic resonance imaging guided prostate biopsy in men with repeat negative biopsies and increased prostate specific antigen. , 2010, The Journal of urology.

[14]  M. Soloway,et al.  Careful selection and close monitoring of low-risk prostate cancer patients on active surveillance minimizes the need for treatment. , 2010, European urology.

[15]  Jan J W Lagendijk,et al.  MRI-guided robotic system for transperineal prostate interventions: proof of principle , 2010, Physics in medicine and biology.

[16]  Gabor Fichtinger,et al.  Integrated navigation and control software system for MRI-guided robotic prostate interventions , 2010, Comput. Medical Imaging Graph..

[17]  Tom W J Scheenen,et al.  Feasibility of a pneumatically actuated MR-compatible robot for transrectal prostate biopsy guidance. , 2011, Radiology.

[18]  B. K. Park,et al.  Prospective evaluation of 3-T MRI performed before initial transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy in patients with high prostate-specific antigen and no previous biopsy. , 2011, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[19]  S. Zangos,et al.  MR-compatible Assistance System for Biopsy in a High-Field-Strength System: Initial Results in Patients with Suspicious Prostate Lesions 1 , 2022 .

[20]  Aaron Fenster,et al.  Clinical application of a 3D ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy system. , 2011, Urologic oncology.

[21]  Jelle O. Barentsz,et al.  MRI-guided and robotic-assisted prostate biopsy , 2012, Current opinion in urology.

[22]  Thomas Hambrock,et al.  Prospective assessment of prostate cancer aggressiveness using 3-T diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging-guided biopsies versus a systematic 10-core transrectal ultrasound prostate biopsy cohort. , 2012, European urology.

[23]  Monish Aron,et al.  3-Dimensional elastic registration system of prostate biopsy location by real-time 3-dimensional transrectal ultrasound guidance with magnetic resonance/transrectal ultrasound image fusion. , 2012, The Journal of urology.

[24]  Thomas Hambrock,et al.  Three-Tesla magnetic resonance-guided prostate biopsy in men with increased prostate-specific antigen and repeated, negative, random, systematic, transrectal ultrasound biopsies: detection of clinically significant prostate cancers. , 2012, European urology.

[25]  Sadhna Verma,et al.  Imaging-guided prostate biopsy: conventional and emerging techniques. , 2012, Radiographics : a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc.

[26]  J. Kim,et al.  Magnetic resonance imaging targeted biopsy in men with previously negative prostate biopsy results. , 2012, Journal of endourology.

[27]  Kemal Tuncali,et al.  In-bore setup and software for 3T MRI-guided transperineal prostate biopsy , 2012, Physics in medicine and biology.

[28]  Christiaan G Overduin,et al.  MRI-Guided Biopsy for Prostate Cancer Detection: A Systematic Review of Current Clinical Results , 2013, Current Urology Reports.

[29]  J. Fütterer,et al.  Standards of reporting for MRI-targeted biopsy studies (START) of the prostate: recommendations from an International Working Group. , 2013, European urology.

[30]  Xavier Leroy,et al.  Prostate cancer diagnosis: multiparametric MR-targeted biopsy with cognitive and transrectal US-MR fusion guidance versus systematic biopsy--prospective multicenter study. , 2013, Radiology.

[31]  Heinz-Peter Schlemmer,et al.  Critical evaluation of magnetic resonance imaging targeted, transrectal ultrasound guided transperineal fusion biopsy for detection of prostate cancer. , 2013, The Journal of urology.

[32]  M. Stifelman,et al.  A prospective, blinded comparison of magnetic resonance (MR) imaging-ultrasound fusion and visual estimation in the performance of MR-targeted prostate biopsy: the PROFUS trial. , 2014, European urology.

[33]  Michael Bock,et al.  Automated real-time needle-guide tracking for fast 3-T MR-guided transrectal prostate biopsy: a feasibility study. , 2014, Radiology.

[34]  P. Albers,et al.  Prospective evaluation of magnetic resonance imaging guided in-bore prostate biopsy versus systematic transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy in biopsy naïve men with elevated prostate specific antigen. , 2014, The Journal of urology.

[35]  J. Fütterer,et al.  Value of 3-T Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Magnetic Resonance–Guided Biopsy for Early Risk Restratification in Active Surveillance of Low-Risk Prostate Cancer: A Prospective Multicenter Cohort Study , 2014, Investigative radiology.

[36]  Gabor Fichtinger,et al.  AAPM and GEC-ESTRO guidelines for image-guided robotic brachytherapy: report of Task Group 192. , 2014, Medical physics.

[37]  F. Schröder,et al.  Prospective study of diagnostic accuracy comparing prostate cancer detection by transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy versus magnetic resonance (MR) imaging with subsequent MR-guided biopsy in men without previous prostate biopsies. , 2014, European urology.

[38]  Aaron Fenster,et al.  Magnetic resonance imaging-targeted, 3D transrectal ultrasound-guided fusion biopsy for prostate cancer: Quantifying the impact of needle delivery error on diagnosis. , 2014, Medical physics.

[39]  P. Albers,et al.  Comparison of patient comfort between MR-guided in-bore and MRI/ultrasound fusion-guided prostate biopsies within a prospective randomized trial , 2016, World Journal of Urology.

[40]  A. Fenster,et al.  Evaluation of MRI-TRUS fusion versus cognitive registration accuracy for MRI-targeted, TRUS-guided prostate biopsy. , 2015, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[41]  Baris Turkbey,et al.  Recent advances in image-guided targeted prostate biopsy , 2015, Abdominal Imaging.

[42]  Kemal Tuncali,et al.  Transperineal in-bore 3-T MR imaging-guided prostate biopsy: a prospective clinical observational study. , 2015, Radiology.

[43]  R. Gardiner,et al.  The global burden of major infectious complications following prostate biopsy , 2015, Epidemiology and Infection.

[44]  Erhard Godehardt,et al.  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. , 2015, European urology.

[45]  Integrated US-MR fusion images and MR targeted biopsies. What are their role and value in the detection and follow-up of prostate cancer. , 2015, Archivos espanoles de urologia.

[46]  Jin Tae Kwak,et al.  Is Visual Registration Equivalent to Semiautomated Registration in Prostate Biopsy? , 2015, BioMed research international.

[47]  Nicola Schieda,et al.  False positive and false negative diagnoses of prostate cancer at multi-parametric prostate MRI in active surveillance , 2015, Insights into Imaging.

[48]  A. Jemal,et al.  Cancer statistics, 2015 , 2015, CA: a cancer journal for clinicians.

[49]  A. Evans,et al.  MR-guided prostate biopsy for planning of focal salvage after radiation therapy. , 2015, Radiology.

[50]  Kemal Tuncali,et al.  3T MR‐guided in‐bore transperineal prostate biopsy: A comparison of robotic and manual needle‐guidance templates , 2015, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[51]  P. Albers,et al.  The use of targeted MR-guided prostate biopsy reduces the risk of Gleason upgrading on radical prostatectomy , 2015, Journal of Cancer Research and Clinical Oncology.

[52]  L. Kavoussi,et al.  In patients with a previous negative prostate biopsy and a suspicious lesion on magnetic resonance imaging, is a 12‐core biopsy still necessary in addition to a targeted biopsy? , 2015, BJU international.

[53]  Katarzyna J Macura,et al.  Synopsis of the PI-RADS v2 Guidelines for Multiparametric Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Recommendations for Use. , 2016, European urology.

[54]  P. Albers,et al.  MRI-Guided In-Bore Biopsy: Differences Between Prostate Cancer Detection and Localization in Primary and Secondary Biopsy Settings. , 2016, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[55]  Tristan Barrett,et al.  Defining the learning curve for multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the prostate using MRI‐transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS) fusion‐guided transperineal prostate biopsies as a validation tool , 2016, BJU international.

[56]  MP16-03 THE IMPACT OF A LEARNING CURVE IN THE PERFORMANCE OF MRI-US FUSION-TARGETED PROSTATE BIOPSY: IMPROVEMENTS IN CANCER DETECTION OVER TIME , 2016 .

[57]  D. Margolis,et al.  PI-RADS Prostate Imaging - Reporting and Data System: 2015, Version 2. , 2016, European urology.

[58]  P. Albers,et al.  Targeted MRI-guided prostate biopsy: are two biopsy cores per MRI-lesion required? , 2016, European Radiology.

[59]  L. Mynderse,et al.  MRI-Guided Prostate Biopsy of Native and Recurrent Prostate Cancer , 2016, Seminars in Interventional Radiology.

[60]  Saila Kauppila,et al.  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. , 2016, European urology.

[61]  E. Haglind,et al.  Oncological and functional outcomes 1 year after radical prostatectomy for very‐low‐risk prostate cancer: results from the prospective LAPPRO trial , 2016, BJU international.

[62]  Dan Stoianovici,et al.  MR Safe Robot, FDA Clearance, Safety and Feasibility of Prostate Biopsy Clinical Trial , 2017, IEEE/ASME Transactions on Mechatronics.

[63]  L. Hooft,et al.  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? , 2017, European urology.