본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

Diagnostic Accuracy and Value of Magnetic Resonance Imaging–Ultrasound Fusion Transperineal Targeted and Template Systematic Prostate Biopsy Based on Bi-parametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging

1

조회

0

다운로드

1

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

주제분류의학일반

초록

Purpose The purpose of this study was to investigate the diagnostic value of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)–ultrasound (US) fusion transperineal targeted biopsy (FTB) and fusion template systematic biopsy (FSB) for prostate cancer (PCa) and clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) (intermediate/high grade [Gleason score ! 3+4]) based on bi-parametric MRI (bpMRI). Materials and Methods Retrospectively, we analyzed 300 patients with elevated prostate-specific antigen (! 4.0 ng/mL) and/or abnormal findings in a digital rectal examination at the Korea University Hospital. All 300 men underwent bpMRI-US fusion transperineal FTB and FSB in the period from April 2017 to March 2019. Results PCas were detected in 158 of 300 men (52.7%), and the prevalence of csPCa was 34.0%. CsPCas were detected in 12 of 102 (11.8%) with Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) 3, 42 of 92 (45.7%) with PI-RADS 4, respectively; and 45 of 62 (72.6%) men with PI-RADS 5, respectively. BpMRI showed a sensitivity of 95.1% and negative predictive value of 89.6% for csPCa. FTB detected additional csPCa in 33 men (12.9%) compared to FSB. Compared to FTB, FSB detected additional csPCa in 10 men (3.9%). Conclusion BpMRI-US FTB and FSB improved detection of PCa and csPCa. The accuracy of bi-parametric MRI is comparable with that of multi-parametric MRI. Further, it is rapid, simpler, cheaper, and no side effects of contrast media. Therefore, it is expected that bpMRI-US transperineal FTB and FSB could be a good alternative to conventional US-guided transrectal biopsy, which is the current gold standard.

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this study was to investigate the diagnostic value of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)–ultrasound (US) fusion transperineal targeted biopsy (FTB) and fusion template systematic biopsy (FSB) for prostate cancer (PCa) and clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) (intermediate/high grade [Gleason score ! 3+4]) based on bi-parametric MRI (bpMRI). Materials and Methods Retrospectively, we analyzed 300 patients with elevated prostate-specific antigen (! 4.0 ng/mL) and/or abnormal findings in a digital rectal examination at the Korea University Hospital. All 300 men underwent bpMRI-US fusion transperineal FTB and FSB in the period from April 2017 to March 2019. Results PCas were detected in 158 of 300 men (52.7%), and the prevalence of csPCa was 34.0%. CsPCas were detected in 12 of 102 (11.8%) with Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) 3, 42 of 92 (45.7%) with PI-RADS 4, respectively; and 45 of 62 (72.6%) men with PI-RADS 5, respectively. BpMRI showed a sensitivity of 95.1% and negative predictive value of 89.6% for csPCa. FTB detected additional csPCa in 33 men (12.9%) compared to FSB. Compared to FTB, FSB detected additional csPCa in 10 men (3.9%). Conclusion BpMRI-US FTB and FSB improved detection of PCa and csPCa. The accuracy of bi-parametric MRI is comparable with that of multi-parametric MRI. Further, it is rapid, simpler, cheaper, and no side effects of contrast media. Therefore, it is expected that bpMRI-US transperineal FTB and FSB could be a good alternative to conventional US-guided transrectal biopsy, which is the current gold standard.

참고문헌 (28)

  1. Ahmed HU, "Diagnostic accuracy of multi-parametric MRI and TRUS biopsy in prostate cancer(PROMIS) : a paired validating confirmatory study", Lancet, 389, pp.815~822 (2017)
  2. Kasivisvanathan V, "MRI-targeted or standard biopsy for prostate-cancer diagnosis", N Engl J Med, 378, pp.1767~1777 (2018)
  3. Drost FH, "Prostate MRI, with or without MRI-targeted biopsy, and systematic biopsy for detecting prostate cancer", Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 4, pp.CD012663~ (2019)
  4. Bonekamp D, "Histopathological to multiparametric MRI spatial mapping of extended systematic sextant and MR", TRUS-fusion-targeted biopsy of the prostate, 2019, pp.29, 1820~1830
  5. Radtke JP, "Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging(MRI)and MRI-transrectal ultrasound fusion biopsy for index tumor detection : correlation with radical prostatectomy specimen", Eur Urol, 70, pp.846~853 (2016)
  6. Schoots IG, "Magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy may enhance the diagnostic accuracy of significant prostate cancer detection compared to standard transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy : a systematic review and meta-analysis", Eur Urol, 68, pp.438~450 (2015)
  7. Weinreb JC, "PI-RADS Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System : 2015, version 2", Eur Urol, 69, pp.16~40 (2016)
  8. Moore CM, "Standards of reporting for MRI-targeted biopsy studies(START)of the prostate : recommendations from an International Working Group", Eur Urol, 64, pp.544~552 (2013)
  9. Barrett T, "PI-RADS version 2 : what you need to know", Clin Radiol, 70, pp.1165~1176 (2015)
  10. Futterer JJ, "Can clinically significant prostate cancer be detected with multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging? A systematic review of the literature", Eur Urol, 68, pp.1045~1053 (2015)
  11. Andreoiu M, "Multifocal prostate cancer : biologic, prognostic, and therapeutic implications", Hum Pathol, 41, pp.781~793 (2010)
  12. Le JD, "Multifocality and prostate cancer detection by multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging : correlation with wholemount histopathology", Eur Urol, 67, pp.569~576 (2015)
  13. Wang RS, "Determination of the role of negative magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate in clinical practice : is biopsy still necessary", Urology, 102, pp.190~197 (2017)
  14. Parry MA, "Genomic evaluation of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging-visible and-nonvisible lesions in clinically localised prostate cancer", Eur Urol Oncol, 2, pp.1~11 (2019)
  15. Rouviere O, "Use of prostate systematic and targeted biopsy on the basis of multiparametric MRI in biopsynaive patients(MRI-FIRST) : a prospective, multicentre, paired diagnostic study", Lancet Oncol, 20, pp.100~109 (2019)
  16. van der Leest M, "Head-to-head comparison of transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy versus multiparametric prostate resonance imaging with subsequent magnetic resonance-guided biopsy in biopsy-naive men with elevated prostate-specific antigen : a large prospective multicenter clinical study", Eur Urol, 75, pp.570~578 (2019)
  17. Rais-Bahrami S, "Diagnostic value of biparametric magnetic resonance imaging(MRI)as an adjunct to prostate-specific antigen(PSA)-based detection of prostate cancer in men without prior biopsies", BJU Int, 115, pp.381~388 (2015)
  18. Porter KK, "Financial implications of biparametric prostate MRI", Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis, 23, pp.88~93 (2020)
  19. Grignon DJ, "Prostate cancer reporting and staging : needle biopsy and radical prostatectomy specimens", Mod Pathol, 31, pp.S96~109 (2018)
  20. Xiang J, "Transperineal versus transrectal prostate biopsy in the diagnosis of prostate cancer : a systematic review and meta-analysis", World J Surg Oncol, 17, pp.31~ (2019)
  21. Sunao Shoji, "Magnetic resonance imaging-transrectal ultrasound fusion image-guided prostate biopsy: Current status of the cancer detection and the prospects of tailor-made medicine of the prostate cancer", Investigative and Clinical Urology, 60(1), pp.4~13 (2019), 대한비뇨의학회[DOI]
  22. Ali A, "Identification and evaluation of clinically significant prostate cancer : a step towards personalized diagnosis", Curr Opin Urol, 27, pp.217~224 (2017)
  23. Siddiqui MM, "Comparison of MR", ultrasound fusionguided biopsy with ultrasound-guided biopsy for the diagnosis of prostate cancer, 2015, pp.313, 390~397
  24. Park KJ, "Characterization and PI-RADS version 2 assessment of prostate cancers missed by prebiopsy 3-T multiparametric MRI : correlation with wholemount thin-section histopathology", Clin Imaging, 55, pp.174~180 (2019)
  25. Mai Z, "The transverse and vertical distribution of prostate cancer in biopsy and radical prostatectomy specimens", BMC Cancer, 18, pp.1205~ (2018)
  26. Priester A, "Magnetic resonance imaging underestimation of prostate cancer geometry : use of patient specific molds to correlate images with whole mount pathology", J Urol, 197, pp.320~326 (2017)
  27. Borghesi M, "Complications after systematic, random, and image-guided prostate biopsy", Eur Urol, 71, pp.353~365 (2017)
  28. Hu Y, "A biopsy simulation study to assess the accuracy of several transrectal ultrasonography(TRUS)-biopsy strategies compared with template prostate mapping biopsies in patients who have undergone radical prostatectomy", BJU Int, 110, pp.812~820 (2012)

관련 논문AI추천

A Predictive Model Based on Bi-parametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Clinical Parameters for Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer in the Korean Population천준, 강석호, 강성구, 강하은, 노태일, 성득제, 심지성, 이정구, 진현정, 태종현, 현창완대한암학회 · Cancer Research and Treatment2021 · 제53권 제4호Visually Estimated MRI Targeted Prostate Biopsy Could Improve the Detection of Significant Prostate Cancer in Patients with a PSA Level <10 ng/mL남종길, 박성우, 이동훈, 이상돈, 이승우, 이준우, 정문기, 한지연연세대학교의과대학 · Yonsei Medical Journal2016 · 제57권 제3호Multiparametric MRI of Prostate Cancer after Biopsy: Little Impact of Hemorrhage on Tumor Staging박용현, 이지열, 정승은, 최문형, 최영진대한자기공명의과학회 · Investigative Magnetic Resonance Imaging2017 · 제21권 제3호Comparison of Standard and Specialized Readings in Routine Practice for the Assessment of Extraprostatic Extension of Prostate Cancer on MRI after Biopsy김시형, 신성희, 염헌규대한자기공명의과학회 · Investigative Magnetic Resonance Imaging2020 · 제24권 제3호Is Small Prostate Volume a Predictor of Gleason Score Upgrading after Radical Prostatectomy?이동훈, 이승환, 정문수, 정병하연세대학교의과대학 · Yonsei Medical Journal2013 · 제54권 제4호Infectious Complications after Prostate Biopsy: A Prospective Multicenter Prostate Biopsy Study정홍, 권동득, 김광현, 김기호, 김영호, 김태형, 김태환, 김태효, 나용길, 민승기, 박성운, 박흥재, 배상락, 심봉석, 양승옥, 양승우, 유호송, 윤하나, 이길호, 이동현, 이상돈, 이서연, 이선주, 이승주, 임동훈, 장인호, 정승일, 정재민, 조용현, 조원열, 조원진, 최현섭, 하유신, 한준현, 한창희, 허정식, 황의창, 대한요로생식기감염학회대한요로생식기감염학회 · Urogenital Tract Infection2016 · 제11권 제1호

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (29건)