Impact of Relative Volume Difference Between Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Three-dimensional Transrectal Ultrasound Segmentation on Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer Detection in Fusion Magnetic Resonance Imaging-targeted Biopsy

被引:0
|
作者
Lenfant, Louis [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Beitone, Clement [2 ]
Troccaz, Jocelyne [2 ]
Beaugerie, Aurelien [1 ]
Roupret, Morgan [1 ]
Seisen, Thomas [1 ]
Renard-Penna, Raphaele [4 ]
Voros, Sandrine [2 ]
Mozer, Pierre C. [1 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Sorbonne Univ, Hop Pitie Salpetriere, AP HP, Urol,GRC 5,Predict Oncourol, Paris, France
[2] Univ Grenoble Alpes, Grenoble INP, TIMC, CNRS,INSERM, Grenoble, France
[3] Sorbonne Univ, Inst Syst Intelligents & Robot ISIR, CNRS UMR 7222, INSERM U1150, Paris, France
[4] Hop La Pitie Salpetriere, AP HP, Acad Dept Radiol, Paris, France
来源
EUROPEAN UROLOGY ONCOLOGY | 2024年 / 7卷 / 03期
关键词
Prostatic neoplasm diagnostic imaging; Image-guided biopsy; Magnetic resonance imaging; Imaging; Three-dimensional methods; Volume difference; Ultrasonography methods; Prostate diagnostic imaging; Biopsy methods; MRI; ULTRASONOGRAPHY; DIAGNOSIS; SYSTEM;
D O I
10.1016/j.euo.2023.07.016
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Background: Segmentation of three-dimensional (3D) transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) images is known to be challenging, and the clinician often lacks a reliable and easy-to-use indicator to assess its accuracy during the fusion magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-targeted prostate biopsy procedure. Objective: To assess the effect of the relative volume difference between 3D-TRUS and MRI segmentation on the outcome of a targeted biopsy. Design, setting, and participants: All adult males who underwent an MRI-targeted prostate biopsy for clinically suspected prostate cancer between February 2012 and July 2021 were consecutively included. Intervention: All patients underwent a fusion MRI-targeted prostate biopsy with a Koelis device. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: Three-dimensional TRUS and MRI prostate volumes were calculated using 3D prostate models issued from the segmentations. The primary outcome was the relative segmentation volume difference (SVD) between transrectal ultrasound and MRI divided by the MRI volume (SVD = MRI volume - TRUS volume/MRI volume) and its correlation with clinically significant prostate cancer (eg, International Society of Urological Pathology [ISUP] >= 2) positiveness on targeted biopsy cores. Results and limitations: Overall, 1721 patients underwent a targeted biopsy resulting in a total of 5593 targeted cores. The median relative SVD was significantly lower in patients diagnosed with clinically significant prostate cancer than in those with ISUP 0-1: (6.7% [interquartile range {IQR} -2.7, 13.6] vs 8.0% [IQR 3.3, 16.4], p < 0.01). A multivariate regression analysis showed that a relative SVD of >10% of the MRI volume was associated with a lower detection rate of clinically significant prostate cancer (odds ratio = 0.74 [95% confidence interval: 0.55-0.98]; p = 0.038). Conclusions: A relative SVD of >10% of the MRI segmented volume was associated with a lower detection rate of clinically significant prostate cancer on targeted biopsy cores. The relative SVD can be used as a per-procedure quality indicator of 3D-TRUS segmentation. (c) 2023 Published by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of European Association of Urology.
引用
收藏
页码:430 / 437
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Detection of clinically significant prostate cancer by transperineal multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion targeted prostate biopsy in smaller prostates
    Dahl, Douglas M.
    Kim, Michelle M.
    Wu, Shulin
    Lin, Sharron X.
    Crotty, Rory K.
    Cornejo, Kristine M.
    Harisinghani, Mukesh G.
    Feldman, Adam S.
    Wu, Chin-Lee
    UROLOGIC ONCOLOGY-SEMINARS AND ORIGINAL INVESTIGATIONS, 2022, 40 (10) : 451.e9 - 451.e14
  • [22] A comparison of prostate tumor targeting strategies using magnetic resonance imaging-targeted, transrectal ultrasound-guided fusion biopsy
    Martin, Peter R.
    Cool, Derek W.
    Fenster, Aaron
    Ward, Aaron D.
    MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2018, 45 (03) : 1018 - 1028
  • [23] Missing the Mark: Prostate Cancer Upgrading by Systematic Biopsy over Magnetic Resonance Imaging/Transrectal Ultrasound Fusion Biopsy
    Muthigi, Akhil
    George, Arvin K.
    Sidana, Abhinav
    Kongnyuy, Michael
    Simon, Richard
    Moreno, Vanessa
    Merino, Maria J.
    Choyke, Peter L.
    Turkbey, Baris
    Wood, Bradford J.
    Pinto, Peter A.
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2017, 197 (02) : 327 - 333
  • [24] Results of a comparative analysis of magnetic resonance imaging-targeted versus three-dimensional transrectal ultrasound prostate biopsies: Size does matter
    Peltier, Alexandre
    Aoun, Fouad
    Albisinni, Simone
    Marcelis, Quentin
    Ledinh, Dam
    Paesmans, Marianne
    Lemort, Marc
    van Velthoven, Roland
    SCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2016, 50 (03) : 144 - 148
  • [25] Magnetic resonance imaging/transrectal ultrasound fusion-targeted prostate biopsy using three-dimensional ultrasound-based organ-tracking technology: Initial experience in Japan
    Yamada, Yasuhiro
    Fujihara, Atsuko
    Shiraishi, Takumi
    Ueda, Takashi
    Yamada, Takeshi
    Ueno, Akihisa
    Inoue, Yuta
    Kaneko, Masatomo
    Kamoi, Kazumi
    Hongo, Fumiya
    Okihara, Koji
    Ukimura, Osamu
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2019, 26 (05) : 544 - 549
  • [26] Environmental Impact of Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Transrectal Ultrasound Guided Prostate Biopsy
    Leapman, Michael S.
    Thiel, Cassandra L.
    Gordon, Ilyssa O.
    Nolte, Adam C.
    Perecman, Aaron
    Loeb, Stacy
    Overcash, Michael
    Sherman, Jodi D.
    EUROPEAN UROLOGY, 2023, 83 (05) : 463 - 471
  • [27] Risk-based Patient Selection for Magnetic Resonance Imaging-targeted Prostate Biopsy after Negative Transrectal Ultrasound-guided Random Biopsy Avoids Unnecessary Magnetic Resonance Imaging Scans
    Alberts, Arnout R.
    Schoots, Ivo G.
    Bokhorst, Leonard P.
    van Leenders, Geert J.
    Bangma, Chris H.
    Roobol, Monique J.
    EUROPEAN UROLOGY, 2016, 69 (06) : 1129 - 1134
  • [28] Comparative Analysis of Transperineal Template Saturation Prostate Biopsy Versus Magnetic Resonance Imaging Targeted Biopsy with Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Ultrasound Fusion Guidance
    Radtke, Jan P.
    Kuru, Timur H.
    Boxler, Silvan
    Alt, Celine D.
    Popeneciu, Ionel V.
    Huettenbrink, Clemens
    Klein, Tilman
    Steinemann, Sarah
    Bergstraesser, Claudia
    Roethke, Matthias
    Roth, Wilfried
    Schlemmer, Heinz-Peter
    Hohenfellner, Markus
    Hadaschik, Boris A.
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2015, 193 (01) : 87 - 94
  • [29] Magnetic resonance imaging/transrectal ultrasonography fusion targeted prostate biopsy finds more significant prostate cancer in biopsy-naive Japanese men compared with the standard biopsy
    Fujii, Shinsuke
    Hayashi, Tetsutaro
    Honda, Yukiko
    Terada, Hiroaki
    Akita, Ryuji
    Kitamura, Naoyuki
    Ueda, Eikoh
    Han, Xiangrui
    Ueno, Takeshi
    Miyamoto, Shunsuke
    Kitano, Hiroyuki
    Inoue, Shogo
    Teishima, Jun
    Abdi, Hamidreza
    Awai, Kazuo
    Takeshima, Yukio
    Sentani, Kazuhiro
    Yasui, Wataru
    Matsubara, Akio
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2020, 27 (02) : 140 - 146
  • [30] Data on the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-guided targeted and systematic biopsy
    Klingebiel, M.
    Arsov, C.
    Ullrich, T.
    Quentin, M.
    Al-Monajjed, R.
    Mally, D.
    Sawicki, L. M.
    Hiester, A.
    Esposito, I
    Albers, P.
    Antoch, G.
    Schimmoeller, L.
    DATA IN BRIEF, 2022, 45