Detection of significant prostate cancer using target saturation in transperineal MRI/ TRUS-fusion biopsy

: Background: 50 Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) and targeted biopsies (TB) 51 facilitate accurate detection of significant prostate cancer (sPC). However, it remains 52 unclear how many cores should be applied per target. 53 Objective: 54 To assess sPC detection rates of two different target-dependent MRI/transrectal 55 ultrasonography (TRUS)-fusion biopsy approaches (TB and target saturation (TS)) 56 compared to extended systematic biopsies (SB). Design, setting and participants: Retrospective single-centre outcome of transperineal MRI/TRUS-fusion biopsies a median urologists and sPC (ISUP grade group ≥ 2) detection rates analyzed. TB was compared to SB and to TS with 9 cores per target, calculated by the Ginsburg scheme and using individual cores of the lesion and its “penumbra”.

[1]  P. Choyke,et al.  MRI-Targeted, Systematic, and Combined Biopsy for Prostate Cancer Diagnosis. , 2020, The New England journal of medicine.

[2]  A. Wetter,et al.  External validation of novel magnetic resonance imaging‐based models for prostate cancer prediction , 2019, BJU international.

[3]  A. Warren,et al.  Optimising the number of cores for magnetic resonance imaging‐guided targeted and systematic transperineal prostate biopsy , 2019, BJU international.

[4]  D. Nieboer,et al.  Prostate MRI, with or without targeted biopsy and standard biopsy for detecting prostate cancer: A Cochrane systematic review and meta-analysis , 2019, European Urology Supplements.

[5]  Laurent Lemaitre,et al.  Use of prostate systematic and targeted biopsy on the basis of multiparametric MRI in biopsy-naive patients (MRI-FIRST): a prospective, multicentre, paired diagnostic study. , 2019, The Lancet. Oncology.

[6]  C. Catalano,et al.  Negative Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Prostate Cancer: What's Next? , 2018, European urology.

[7]  K. Nikolaou,et al.  Targeted vs systematic robot‐assisted transperineal magnetic resonance imaging‐transrectal ultrasonography fusion prostate biopsy , 2018, BJU international.

[8]  D. Margolis,et al.  MRI‐Targeted or Standard Biopsy for Prostate‐Cancer Diagnosis , 2018, The New England journal of medicine.

[9]  A. Sidana,et al.  Risk of Upgrading from Prostate Biopsy to Radical Prostatectomy Pathology—Does Saturation Biopsy of Index Lesion during Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging‐Transrectal Ultrasound Fusion Biopsy Help? , 2017, The Journal of urology.

[10]  Elton Llukani,et al.  The Role of Ipsilateral and Contralateral Transrectal Ultrasound-guided Systematic Prostate Biopsy in Men With Unilateral Magnetic Resonance Imaging Lesion Undergoing Magnetic Resonance Imaging-ultrasound Fusion-targeted Prostate Biopsy. , 2017, Urology.

[11]  B. Hadaschik,et al.  TOP: Prospective Evaluation of a Volume Based, Computer Assisted Method for Transperineal Optimized Prostate Biopsy , 2017, Urologia Internationalis.

[12]  M. Parmar,et al.  Diagnostic accuracy of multi-parametric MRI and TRUS biopsy in prostate cancer (PROMIS): a paired validating confi rmatory study , 2018 .

[13]  P. Albers,et al.  Risk stratification of ‘ equivocal ’ PI-RADS lesions in mp-MRI of the prostate , 2017 .

[14]  M. Roethke,et al.  Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) and MRI-Transrectal Ultrasound Fusion Biopsy for Index Tumor Detection: Correlation with Radical Prostatectomy Specimen. , 2016, European urology.

[15]  Adam T Froemming,et al.  Interobserver Reproducibility of the PI-RADS Version 2 Lexicon: A Multicenter Study of Six Experienced Prostate Radiologists. , 2016, Radiology.

[16]  J. Bernhard,et al.  Magnetic resonance imaging-transectal ultrasound image-fusion biopsies accurately characterize the index tumor: correlation with step-sectioned radical prostatectomy specimens in 135 patients. , 2015, European urology.

[17]  H. Rusinek,et al.  Image Guided Focal Therapy Of MRI-Visible Prostate Cancer: Defining a 3D Treatment Margin based on MRI-Histology Co-registration Analysis , 2015 .

[18]  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.

[19]  M. Roethke,et al.  Definitions of terms, processes and a minimum dataset for transperineal prostate biopsies: a standardization approach of the Ginsburg Study Group for Enhanced Prostate Diagnostics , 2013, BJU international.

[20]  D. Rennie,et al.  Towards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: The STARD Initiative. , 2007, Annals of internal medicine.

[21]  T. Tango.  EQUIVALENCE TEST AND CONFIDENCE INTERVAL FOR THE DIFFERENCE IN PROPORTIONS FOR THE PAIRED-SAMPLE DESIGN , 1998 .