Editorial Comment to Magnetic resonance imaging/transrectal ultrasound fusion‐targeted prostate biopsy using three‐dimensional ultrasound‐based organ‐tracking technology: Initial experience in Japan

2019 ◽  
Vol 26 (5) ◽  
pp. 549-550
Author(s):  
Yoh Matsuoka
Keyword(s):  
Magnetic Resonance Imaging ◽  
Magnetic Resonance ◽  
Editorial Comment ◽  
Prostate Biopsy ◽  
Transrectal Ultrasound ◽  
Three Dimensional ◽  
Initial Experience ◽  
Resonance Imaging ◽  
Tracking Technology

One-year experience of government-funded magnetic resonance imaging prior to prostate biopsy: A case for omitting biopsy in men with a negative magnetic resonance imaging

2021 ◽  
pp. 205141582110043
Author(s):  
Hanna J El-Khoury ◽  
Niranjan J Sathianathen ◽  
Yuxin Jiao ◽  
Reza Farzan ◽  
Dennis Gyomber ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Magnetic Resonance Imaging ◽  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Magnetic Resonance ◽  
Prostate Biopsy ◽  
Multivariable Analysis ◽  
Transrectal Ultrasound ◽  
Resonance Imaging ◽  
Retrospective Case ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Clinically Significant

Objectives: This study aimed to characterise the accuracy of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) as an adjunct to prostate biopsy, and to assess the effect of the new Australian Medicare rebate on practice at a metropolitan public hospital. Patients and methods: We identified patients who underwent transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided prostate biopsy at a single institution over a two-year period. Patients were placed into two groups, depending upon whether their consent was obtained before or after the introduction of the Australian Medicare rebate for mpMRI. We extracted data on mpMRI results and TRUS-guided biopsy histopathology. Descriptive statistics were used to demonstrate baseline patient characteristics as well as MRI and histopathology results. Results: A total of 252 patients were included for analysis, of whom 128 underwent biopsy following the introduction of the Medicare rebate for mpMRI. There was a significant association between Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System v2 (PI-RADS) classification and the diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer ( p<0.01). Only one man with PI-RADS ⩽2 was found to have clinically significant prostate cancer. Four men with a PI-RADS 3 lesion were found to have clinically significant cancer. A PI-RADS 4 or 5 lesion was significantly associated with the diagnosis of clinically significant cancer on multivariable analysis. Conclusion: mpMRI is an important adjunct to biopsy in the diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer. Our findings support the safety of omitting/delaying prostate biopsy in men with negative mpMRI. Level of evidence: Level 3 retrospective case-control study.

Three-dimensional spin-lock magnetic resonance imaging of the shoulder joint at 3 T: initial experience

2007 ◽  
Vol 36 (12) ◽  
pp. 1171-1175 ◽  
Author(s):  
Renata La Rocca Vieira ◽  
Sait Kubilay Pakin ◽  
Conrado Furtado de Albuquerque Cavalcanti ◽  
Mark Schweitzer ◽  
Ravinder Regatte
Keyword(s):  
Magnetic Resonance Imaging ◽  
Magnetic Resonance ◽  
Shoulder Joint ◽  
Three Dimensional ◽  
Initial Experience ◽  
Resonance Imaging ◽  
Spin Lock

scholarly journals Histology results of systematic prostate biopsies by in-bore magnetic resonance imaging vs. transrectal ultrasound

2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (5) ◽  
Author(s):  
Alon Lazarovich ◽  
Gil Raviv ◽  
Yael Laitman ◽  
Orith Portnoy ◽  
Orit Raz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Magnetic Resonance Imaging ◽  
Magnetic Resonance ◽  
Prostate Biopsy ◽  
Specific Antigen ◽  
Transrectal Ultrasound ◽  
Digital Rectal Examination ◽  
Resonance Imaging ◽  
Rectal Examination ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
Clinically Significant

Introduction: We aimed to compare systematic biopsies (SBs) of in-bore magnetic resonance-guided prostate biopsy (MRGpB) with those performed under transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) guidance in the clinical setting. Methods: Data on all 161 consecutive patients undergoing prostate biopsy in our institution between November 2017 and July 2019 were retrospectively collected. The patients were referred to biopsy due to elevated prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and/or abnormal digital rectal examination and/or at least one Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) lesion score of ≥3 on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI). We included patients with PSA levels ≤20 ng/ml and those with 8–12 core biopsies. Histology results of SBs performed by in-bore MRGpB were compared to TRUS SBs. Chi-squared, Fischer’s exact, and multivariate Pearson regression tests were used for statistical analysis (SPSS, IBM Corporation). Results: In total, 128 patients were eligible for analysis. Their median age was 68 years (interquartile range [IQR] 61.5–72), mean prostate size 55±29 cc, and mean PSA and PSA density levels 7.6±3.5 ng/ml and 0.18±0.13 ng/ml/cc, respectively. Thirty-five patients (27.3%) had suspicious digital rectal examination findings. Both biopsy groups were similar for these parameters. Thirty-eight (62.3%) MRGpB patients had a previous biopsy vs. 5 (7.1%) TRUS-SB patients (p<0.0001). The number of patients diagnosed with clinically significant and non-significant disease was similar for both groups. High-risk disease was more prevalent in the TRUS-SB group (22.4% vs. 4.9%, p<0.01). Conclusions: Our data suggest that in-bore MRGpB is no better than TRUS for guiding SBs for the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document