Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Recent advances in image-guided targeted prostate biopsy

  • Pictorial Essay
  • Published:
Abdominal Imaging Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Prostate cancer is a common malignancy in the United States that results in over 30,000 deaths per year. The current state of prostate cancer diagnosis, based on PSA screening and sextant biopsy, has been criticized for both overdiagnosis of low-grade tumors and underdiagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancers (Gleason score ≥7). Recently, image guidance has been added to perform targeted biopsies of lesions detected on multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) scans. These methods have improved the ability to detect clinically significant cancer, while reducing the diagnosis of low-grade tumors. Several approaches have been explored to improve the accuracy of image-guided targeted prostate biopsy, including in-bore MRI-guided, cognitive fusion, and MRI/transrectal ultrasound fusion-guided biopsy. This review will examine recent advances in these image-guided targeted prostate biopsy techniques.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. (2013) What are the key statistics about prostate cancer? www.cancer.org1

  2. Sindhwani P, Wilson CM (2005) Prostatitis and serum prostate-specific antigen. Curr Prostate Rep 3:81–86. doi:10.1007/s11918-005-0020-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Bouraoui Y, Ricote M, García-Tuñón I, et al. (2008) Pro-inflammatory cytokines and prostate-specific antigen in hyperplasia and human prostate cancer. Cancer Detect Prev 32:23–32. doi:10.1016/j.cdp.2008.02.007

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Lazzeri M, Abrate A, Lughezzani G, et al. (2014) Relationship of chronic histologic prostatic inflammation in biopsy specimens with serum isoform [-2]proPSA (p2PSA), %p2PSA, and prostate health index in men with a total prostate-specific antigen of 4-10 ng/ml and normal digital rectal examination. Urology 83:606–612. doi:10.1016/j.urology.2013.10.016

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Hedelin H, Johansson N, Ströberg P (2005) Relationship between benign prostatic hyperplasia and lower urinary tract symptoms and correlation between prostate volume and serum prostate-specific antigen in clinical routine. Scand J Urol Nephrol 39:154–159. doi:10.1080/00365590510007685

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. The website of the National Cancer Institute. http://www.cancer.gov.

  7. Moyer VA (2012) Screening for prosate cancer: U.S. preventive services task force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med 157:120–135

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Screening for Prostate Cancer, Topic Page. http://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/prostatecancerscreening.htm.

  9. Ilic D, Neuberger M, Djulbegovic M, Dahm P (2013) Screening for prostate cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD004720.pub3

    Google Scholar 

  10. Vickers AJ, Thompson IM, Klein E, et al. (2014) A commentary on PSA velocity and doubling time for clinical decisions in prostate cancer. Urology 83:592–596. doi:10.1016/j.urology.2013.09.075

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Chiu PK-F, Teoh JY-C, Chan SY-S, et al. (2014) Role of PSA density in diagnosis of prostate cancer in obese men. Int Urol Nephrol 1–4:1–4. doi:10.1007/s11255-014-0826-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Tormey WP (2014) The complexity of PSA interpretation in clinical practice. Surgeon 10–14:323–327. doi:10.1016/j.surge.2014.04.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Blanchard P, Bakkour M, De Crevoisier R, et al. (2014) Early PSA level decline is an independent predictor of biochemical and clinical control for salvage postprostatectomy radiotherapy. Urol Oncol 1–6. doi:10.1016/j.urolonc.2014.07.020

  14. Anastasiadis E, van der Meulen J, Emberton M (2014) Hospital admissions after transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy of the prostate in men diagnosed with prostate cancer: a database analysis in England. Int J Urol . doi:10.1111/iju.12634

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Djavan B, Margreiter M (2007) Biopsy standards for detection of prostate cancer. World J Urol 25:11–17. doi:10.1007/s00345-007-0151-1

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Pallwein L, Mitterberger M, Pelzer A, et al. (2008) Ultrasound of prostate cancer: recent advances. Eur Radiol 18:707–715. doi:10.1007/s00330-007-0779-7

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Ellis WJ, Brawer MK (1995) Repeat prostate needle biopsy: who needs it? J Urol 153:1496–1498

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Itatani R, Namimoto T, Atsuji S, et al. (2014) Negative predictive value of multiparametric MRI for prostate cancer detection: outcome of 5-year follow-up in men with negative findings on initial MRI studies. Eur J Radiol 83:1740–1745. doi:10.1016/j.ejrad.2014.06.026

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Van den Bosch MR, Moman MR, van Vulpen M, et al. (2010) MRI-guided robotic system for transperineal prostate interventions: proof of principle. Phys Med Biol 55:N133–N140. doi:10.1088/0031-9155/55/5/N02

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Anastasiadis AG, Lichy MP, Nagele U, et al. (2006) MRI-guided biopsy of the prostate increases diagnostic performance in men with elevated or increasing PSA levels after previous negative TRUS biopsies. Eur Urol 50:738–48; discussion 748–749. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2006.03.007

  21. Beyersdorff D, Winkel A, Hamm B, et al. (2005) Radiology MR imaging—guided prostate biopsy with a Closed MR Unit at 1. 5 T: Initial Results 1.

  22. Pinto F, Totaro A, Calarco A, et al. (2011) Imaging in prostate cancer diagnosis: present role and future perspectives. Urol Int 86:373–382. doi:10.1159/000324515

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Haffner J, Lemaitre L, Puech P, et al. (2011) Role of magnetic resonance imaging before initial biopsy: comparison of magnetic resonance imaging-targeted and systematic biopsy for significant prostate cancer detection. BJU Int 108:E171–E178. doi:10.1111/j.1464-410X.2011.10112.x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Park BK, Park JW, Park SY, et al. (2011) 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. AJR Am J Roentgenol 197:W876–W881. doi:10.2214/AJR.11.6829

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Labanaris a P, Engelhard K, Zugor V, et al. (2010) Prostate cancer detection using an extended prostate biopsy schema in combination with additional targeted cores from suspicious images in conventional and functional endorectal magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 13:65–70. doi:10.1038/pcan.2009.41

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Siddiqui MM, Rais-Bahrami S, Truong H, et al. (2013) Magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound-fusion biopsy significantly upgrades prostate cancer versus systematic 12-core transrectal ultrasound biopsy. Eur Urol 64:713–719. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2013.05.059

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Pinto PA, Chung PH, Rastinehad AR, et al. (2011) Magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound fusion guided prostate biopsy improves cancer detection following transrectal ultrasound biopsy and correlates with multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging. J Urol 186:1281–1285. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2011.05.078

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Delongchamps NB, Peyromaure M, Schull A, et al. (2013) Prebiopsy magnetic resonance imaging and prostate cancer detection: comparison of random and targeted biopsies. J Urol 189:493–499. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2012.08.195

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Puech P, Rouvière O, Renard-Penna R, et al. (2013) Prostate cancer diagnosis: multiparametric MR-targeted Biopsy with Cognitive and Transrectal US—MR fusion Guidance versus Systematic Biopsy—Prospective Multicenter Study. 268:461–469. doi:10.1148/radiol.13121501/-/DC1

  30. Scherr D, Eastham J, Ohori M, Scardino P (2002) Prostate biopsy techniques and indications: when, where, and how? Semin Urol Oncol 20:18–31

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Hodge KK, McNeal JE, Terris MK, Stamey TA (1989) Random systematic versus directed ultrasound guided transrectal core biopsies of the prostate. J Urol 142:71–74; discussion 74–75.

  32. Babaian R, Toi A, Kamoi K, et al. (2000) A comparative analysis of sextant and an extended 11-core multisite directed biopsy strategy. J Urol 163:152–157

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Jr PJ, O’Dowd G, Miller M, et al. (2003) Extended peripheral zone biopsy schemes increase cancer detection rates and minimize variance in prostate specific antigen and age related cancer rates: results of a community multi-practice study. J Urol 169:125–129

    Google Scholar 

  34. Naughton C, Miller D, Yan Y (2001) Impact of transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy on quality of life: a prospective randomized trial comparing 6 versus 12 cores. J Urol 165:100–103. doi:10.1097/00005392-200101000-00025

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Cooperberg MR, Broering JM, Kantoff PW, Carroll PR (2007) Contemporary trends in low risk prostate cancer: risk assessment and treatment. J Urol 178:S14–S19. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2007.03.135

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Taira A, Merrick GS, Galbreath RW, et al. (2010) Natural history of clinically staged low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer treated with monotherapeutic permanent interstitial brachytherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 76:349–354. doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2009.02.021

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Djavan B, Margreiter M (2007) Biopsy standards for detection of prostate cancer. World J Urol 25:11–17. doi:10.1007/s00345-007-0151-1

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Durkan GC, Greene DR (2000) Diagnostic dilemmas in detection of prostate cancer in patients undergoing transrectal ultrasound-guided needle biopsy of the prostate. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 3:13–20. doi:10.1038/sj.pcan.4500398

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. McNeal JE, Redwine EA, Freiha FS, Stamey TA (1988) Zonal distribution of prostatic carcinoma: correlation with histologic pattern and direction of spread. Am J Surg Pathol 12:897–906

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Robertson NL, Emberton M, Moore CM (2013) MRI-targeted prostate biopsy: a review of technique and results. Nat Rev Urol 10:589–597. doi:10.1038/nrurol.2013.196

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Hoeks CMA, Schouten MG, Bomers JGR, et al. (2012) 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. Eur Urol 62:902–909. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2012.01.047

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Roethke M, Anastasiadis AG, Lichy M, et al. (2012) MRI-guided prostate biopsy detects clinically significant cancer: analysis of a cohort of 100 patients after previous negative TRUS biopsy. World J Urol 30:213–218. doi:10.1007/s00345-011-0675-2

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Overduin CG, Fütterer JJ, Barentsz JO (2013) MRI-guided biopsy for prostate cancer detection: a systematic review of current clinical results. Curr Urol Rep 14:209–213. doi:10.1007/s11934-013-0323-z

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Hong CW, Amalou H, Xu S, et al. (2014) Prostate biopsy for the interventional radiologist. J Vasc Interv Radiol 25:675–684. doi:10.1016/j.jvir.2013.12.568

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Logan JK, Rais-Bahrami S, Turkbey B, et al. (2013) Current status of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and ultrasonography fusion software platforms for guidance of prostate biopsies. BJU Int . doi:10.1111/bju.12593

    Google Scholar 

  46. Sciarra A, Panebianco V, Ciccariello M, et al. (2010) Value of magnetic resonance spectroscopy imaging and dynamic contrast-enhanced imaging for detecting prostate cancer foci in men with prior negative biopsy. Clin Cancer Res 16:1875–1883. doi:10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-09-2195

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Kaplan I, Oldenburg NE, Meskell P, et al. (2002) Real time MRI-ultrasound image guided stereotactic prostate biopsy. Magn Reson Imaging 20:295–299

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Xu S, Kruecker J, Guion P, et al. (2007) Closed-loop control in fused MR-TRUS image-guided prostate biopsy. Med Image Comput Comput Assist Interv 10:128–135

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Turkbey B, Xu S, Kruecker J, et al. (2011) Documenting the location of prostate biopsies with image fusion. BJU Int 107:53–57. doi:10.1111/j.1464-410X.2010.09483.x

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Singh AK, Kruecker J, Xu S, et al. (2008) Initial clinical experience with real-time transrectal ultrasonography-magnetic resonance imaging fusion-guided prostate biopsy. BJU Int 101:841–845. doi:10.1111/j.1464-410X.2007.07348.x

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Xu S, Kruecker J, Turkbey B, et al. (2008) Real-time MRI-TRUS fusion for guidance of targeted prostate biopsies. Comput Aided Surg 13:255–264. doi:10.3109/10929080802364645

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Rastinehad AR, Turkbey B, Salami SS, et al. (2013) Improving detection of clinically significant prostate cancer: magnetic resonance imaging/transrectal ultrasound fusion guided prostate biopsy. J Urol 191:1749–1754. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2013.12.007

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Vourganti S, Rastinehad A, Yerram NK, et al. (2012) Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasound fusion biopsy detect prostate cancer in patients with prior negative transrectal ultrasound biopsies. J Urol 188:2152–2157. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2012.08.025

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Marks L, Young S, Natarajan S (2013) MRI-ultrasound fusion for guidance of targeted prostate biopsy. Curr Opin Urol 23:43–50. doi:10.1097/MOU.0b013e32835ad3ee

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Wysock JS, Rosenkrantz AB, Huang WC, et al. (2013) 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. Eur Urol 66:343–351. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2013.10.048

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Sonn GA, Natarajan S, Margolis DJ, et al. (2013) Targeted biopsy in the detection of prostate cancer using an office based magnetic resonance ultrasound fusion device. J Urol 189:86–91. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2012.08.095

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Sonn GA, Chang E, Natarajan S, et al. (2014) Value of targeted prostate biopsy using magnetic resonance-ultrasound fusion in men with prior negative biopsy and elevated prostate-specific antigen. Eur Urol 65:809–815. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2013.03.025

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Sonn GA, Filson CP, Chang E, et al. (2014) Initial experience with electronic tracking of specific tumor sites in men undergoing active surveillance of prostate cancer. Urol Oncol 1–6:952–957. doi:10.1016/j.urolonc.2014.04.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Ukimura O, Desai MM, Palmer S, et al. (2012) 3-Dimensional elastic registration system of prostate biopsy location by real-time 3-dimensional transrectal ultrasound guidance with magnetic resonance/transrectal ultrasound image fusion. J Urol 187:1080–1086. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2011.10.124

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Cornud F, Brolis L, Delongchamps NB, et al. (2013) TRUS-MRI image registration: a paradigm shift in the diagnosis of significant prostate cancer. Abdom Imaging 38:1447–1463. doi:10.1007/s00261-013-0018-4

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Rud E, Baco E, Eggesbø HB (2012) MRI and ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy using soft image fusion. Anticancer Res 32:3383–3389

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Mozer P, Rouprêt M, Le Cossec C, et al. (2014) First round of targeted biopsies using magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasonography fusion compared with conventional transrectal ultrasonography-guided biopsies for the diagnosis of localised prostate cancer. BJU Int . doi:10.1111/bju.12690

    Google Scholar 

  63. Kuru TH, Roethke MC, Seidenader J, et al. (2013) Critical evaluation of magnetic resonance imaging targeted, transrectal ultrasound guided transperineal fusion biopsy for detection of prostate cancer. J Urol 190:1380–1386. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2013.04.043

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Radtke JP, Kuru TH, Boxler S, et al. (2014) Comparative analysis of transperineal template-saturation prostate biopsy versus MRI-targeted biopsy with MRI-US fusion-guidance. J Urol . doi:10.1016/j.juro.2014.07.098

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Miyagawa T, Ishikawa S, Kimura T, et al. (2010) Real-time Virtual Sonography for navigation during targeted prostate biopsy using magnetic resonance imaging data. Int J Urol 17:855–860. doi:10.1111/j.1442-2042.2010.02612.x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Willis SR, Ahmed HU, Moore CM, et al. (2014) Multiparametric MRI followed by targeted prostate biopsy for men with suspected prostate cancer: a clinical decision analysis. BMJ Open 4:e004895. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2014-004895

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research was made possible through the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Medical Research Scholars Program, a public-private partnership supported jointly by the NIH and generous contributions to the Foundation for the NIH from Pfizer Inc, The Doris Duke Charitable Foundation, The Newport Foundation, The American Association for Dental Research, The Howard Hughes Medical Institute, and the Colgate-Palmolive Company, as well as other private donors. For a complete list, please visit the Foundation website at:http://fnih.org/work/education-training-0/medical-research-scholars-program.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, MD, USA

    Anna M. Brown, Osama Elbuluk, Francesca Mertan, Sandeep Sankineni, Peter L. Choyke & Baris Turkbey

  2. Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA

    Anna M. Brown

  3. David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, USA

    Osama Elbuluk & Daniel J. Margolis

  4. Grove City College, Grove City, PA, USA

    Francesca Mertan

  5. Center for Interventional Oncology, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, MD, USA

    Bradford J. Wood & Peter A. Pinto

  6. Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, MD, USA

    Peter A. Pinto

  7. Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, NIH, 10 Center Drive, Room B3B85, Bethesda, MD, 20892, USA

    Baris Turkbey

Authors
  1. Anna M. Brown
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Osama Elbuluk
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Francesca Mertan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Sandeep Sankineni
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Daniel J. Margolis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Bradford J. Wood
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Peter A. Pinto
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Peter L. Choyke
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Baris Turkbey
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Baris Turkbey.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Brown, A.M., Elbuluk, O., Mertan, F. et al. Recent advances in image-guided targeted prostate biopsy. Abdom Imaging 40, 1788–1799 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-015-0353-8

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-015-0353-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation