Clinical feasibility of MRI-guided in-bore prostate biopsies at 0.55T

被引:1
|
作者
Kaur, Tejinder [1 ]
Jiang, Yun [1 ]
Seiberlich, Nicole [1 ]
Hussain, Hero [1 ]
Wells, Shane [1 ]
Wei, John [1 ]
Caoili, Elaine [1 ]
Gulani, Vikas [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109 USA
关键词
Prostate biopsy; MRI; Prostate cancer; Transrectal; Percutaneous; In-bore; ULTRASOUND FUSION; STRATEGIES; CANCER;
D O I
10.1007/s00261-024-04783-x
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
ObjectiveIn-bore MRI-guided biopsy allows direct visualization of suspicious lesions, biopsy needles, and trajectories, allowing accurate sampling when MRI-ultrasound fusion biopsy is not feasible. However, its use has been limited. Wide-bore, lower-field, and lower-cost scanners could help address these issues, but their feasibility for prostate biopsy is unknown. The purpose of our study was to evaluate the feasibility of in-bore MRI-guided prostate biopsy using a large-bore (80 cm), 0.55T scanner.Materials and methodsNineteen participants (68 +/- 10 years) with suspected prostate cancer (PCa) were recruited for this Institutional Review Board (IRB) approved study (May 2023 -October 2024). Prebiopsy diagnostic scans and intra-procedural T2-weighted images were used for lesion localization. PSA levels, lesion sizes, cancer detection rates, positive core volume percentage, ISUP (International Society of Urological Pathology) grade groups (GG), positive volume cores, skin to target distances, and procedure durations were reported.ResultsSeventeen participants underwent biopsies (four transrectal, thirteen percutaneous). Two participants were excluded. Twenty lesions (mean size 1.9 +/- 1.2 cm) were biopsied which showed various GG cancers (GG1, GG2, GG3, GG4, and GG5), with positive cores ranging from 10 to 100%. 20% of the lesions were benign. Compared to previous biopsies, 22.2% (2/9) had new cancer detections, 22.2% (2/9) showed a GG upgrade, and 33.3% (3/9) had increased positive core volume, while 11.1% (1/9) showed no upgrade and 11.1% (1/9) had benign findings. Among biopsy-na & iuml;ve participants, 75% (6/8) had cancer detected, and 25% (2/8) had benign findings. One new cancer was detected near a hip prosthesis due to reduced imaging artifacts. Average total procedure time was 77 +/- 21 min for transrectal and 74 +/- 22 min for percutaneous biopsies, with times to first core at 45 +/- 15 and 53 +/- 14 min, respectively.ConclusionIdentifying and accurately targeting suspicious prostate lesions is feasible using a 0.55T MRI scanner.
引用
收藏
页数:11
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] In-bore biopsies of the prostate assisted by a remote-controlled manipulator at 1.5 T
    Linder, Nicolas
    Schaudinn, Alexander
    Petersen, Tim-Ole
    Bailis, Nikolaos
    Stumpp, Patrick
    Horn, Lars-Christian
    Stolzenburg, Jens-Uwe
    Kahn, Thomas
    Moche, Michael
    Busse, Harald
    MAGNETIC RESONANCE MATERIALS IN PHYSICS BIOLOGY AND MEDICINE, 2019, 32 (05) : 599 - 605
  • [22] MRI-guided targeted prostate biopsies in the diagnosis of prostate cancer: A systematic literature review
    Fiard, G.
    Descotes, J. -L.
    Rambeaud, J. -J.
    Hohn, N.
    Troccaz, J.
    Long, J. -A.
    PROGRES EN UROLOGIE, 2012, 22 (15): : 903 - 912
  • [23] Clinical Utility of Endorectal MRI-Guided Prostate Biopsy: Preliminary Experience
    Jung, Adam J.
    Westphalen, Antonio C.
    Kurhanewicz, John
    Wang, Zhen J.
    Carroll, Peter R.
    Simko, Jeffry P.
    Coakley, Fergus V.
    JOURNAL OF MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING, 2014, 40 (02) : 314 - 323
  • [24] Interreader Agreement of Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2 Using an In-Bore MRI-Guided Prostate Biopsy Cohort: A Single Institution's Initial Experience
    Glazer, Daniel I.
    Mayo-Smith, William W.
    Sainani, Nisha I.
    Sadow, Cheryl A.
    Vangel, Mark G.
    Tempany, Clare M.
    Dunne, Ruth M.
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 2017, 209 (03) : W145 - W151
  • [25] MRI-Guided Prostate Interventions
    Walser, Eric M.
    Sze, Thaddeus F.
    Ross, Jason R.
    Karamanian, Ara A.
    Woodrum, David A.
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 2016, 207 (04) : 755 - 763
  • [26] Gleason Grade Group Concordance between Preoperative Targeted Biopsy and Radical Prostatectomy Histopathologic Analysis: A Comparison Between In-Bore MRI-guided and MRI-Transrectal US Fusion Prostate Biopsies
    Costa, Daniel N.
    Cai, Qi
    Xi, Yin
    Recchimuzzi, Debora Z.
    Subramanian, Naveen
    Bagrodia, Aditya
    Rofsky, Neil M.
    Roehrborn, Claus G.
    Hornberger, Brad
    Shah, Rajal B.
    Goldberg, Kenneth
    de Leon, Alberto Diaz
    Pedrosa, Ivan
    RADIOLOGY-IMAGING CANCER, 2021, 3 (02):
  • [27] MRI-guided biopsies and minimally invasive therapy for prostate cancer
    Ghai, Sangeet
    Trachtenberg, John
    INDIAN JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2015, 31 (03) : 209 - 216
  • [28] Evaluation of a robotic technique for transrectal MRI-guided prostate biopsies
    Martijn G. Schouten
    Joyce G. R. Bomers
    Derya Yakar
    Henkjan Huisman
    Eva Rothgang
    Dennis Bosboom
    Tom W. J. Scheenen
    Sarthak Misra
    Jurgen J. Fütterer
    European Radiology, 2012, 22 : 476 - 483
  • [29] Cost-Effectiveness Comparison of Imaging-Guided Prostate Biopsy Techniques: Systematic Transrectal Ultrasound, Direct In-Bore MRI, and Image Fusion
    Venderink, Wulphert
    Govers, Tim M.
    de Rooij, Maarten
    Futterer, Jurgen J.
    Sedelaar, J. P. Michiel
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 2017, 208 (05) : 1058 - 1063
  • [30] MRI-guided in-bore biopsy for prostate cancer: what does the evidence say? A case series of 554 patients and a review of the current literature
    Pokorny, Morgan
    Kua, Boon
    Esler, Rachel
    Yaxley, John
    Samaratunga, Hemamali
    Dunglison, Nigel
    Gianduzzo, Troy
    Coughlin, Geoff
    Holt, Ross
    Laing, Barbara
    Ault, Darren
    Brown, Nicholas
    Parkinson, Rob
    Thompson, Les
    WORLD JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2019, 37 (07) : 1263 - 1279