Yazılım Destekli Manyetik Rezonans Ultrason Füzyon Biyopsi Tekniklerine Güncel Bakış

Year 2020, Volume: 12 Issue: 1, 78 - 86, 30.01.2020

Selahattin Bedir , Engin Kaya , Serdar Yalçın , Murat Zor

Abstract

Günümüzde multiparametrik prostat magnetik rezonans görüntüleme (mp-MRG) yardımlı hedefe yönelik biyopsilerin en önemli kullanım endikasyonunu, daha önce negatif biyopsisi olan ancak klinik olarak kanser şüphesinin devam ettiği olgular oluşturmaktadır. Günümüzde, hem Avrupa Üroloji Derneği hem de Amerikan Üroloji Derneği güncel kılavuzlarında, prostat kanseri şüphesi bulunan ve daha önce negatif prostat biyopsisi bulunan olgularda sistemik biyopsi ile birlikte hedefe yönelik biyopsi yapılması önerilmektedir. Hedefe yönelik prostat biyopsileri 2 başlık altında toplanabilir. İlki direkt olarak hasta magnetik rezonans (MR) gantry cihazı içerisinde iken MR görüntüsü altında biyopsi alınması şeklinde tanımlanan in-gantry biyopsi iken, diğeri MR görüntüsü ile transrektal ultrasonografi (TRUS) görüntüsünün kognitif veya çeşitli platformlarda yazılım destekli füzyonu ile yapılan MR-US füzyon biyopsilerdir (FB). Biz bu derlememizde yazılım destekli MR-US FB tekniklerinden, kısaca bunların sonuçlarından ve kendi klinik tecrübelerimizden bahsedeceğiz. Yazımız MR-US füzyon biyopsi teknikleri, kognitif MR-US füzyon prostat biyopsi, yazılım destekli MR-US FB ve sonuç başlıkları altında derlenmiştir. 

Keywords

MR-FÜZYON, PROSTAT BİYOPSİSİ, PROSTAT KANSERİ

Current Overview of Software Assisted Magnetic Resonance Ultrasound Fusion Biopsy Techniques

Abstract

Today, the most important indication for multiparametric prostate magnetic resonance imaging (mp-MRI) assisted targeted biopsies is the presence of previously negative biopsy but still clinically suspected cancer. Currently, both the European Association of Urology and the American Association of Urology recommend that targeted biopsy with systemic biopsy be performed in patients with suspected prostate cancer and previous negative prostate biopsy. Targeted prostate biopsies can be grouped under 2 headings. The first is an in-gantry biopsy, which is defined as direct biopsy under magnetic resonance (MR) image while the patient is in a MR gantry device, while the other is MR-US fusion biopsies (FB) performed by cognitive or software-assisted fusion of the MR image and transrectal ultrasound (TRUS). In this review, we will discuss software-assisted MR-US FB techniques, their results and our own clinical experience. This article has been compiled under the titles of MR-US fusion biopsy techniques, cognitive MR-US fusion prostate biopsy, software-assisted MR-US FB and results.

Keywords

MR-US Fusion Biopsy, Prostate Cancer

References

• 1. Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, et al. Global Cancer Statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin.
• 2. Lecornet E, Ahmet HU, Hu Y, Moore CM, Nevoux P, Barratt D, Hawkes D, Villers A, Emberton M.The accuracy of different biopsy strategies for the detection of clinically important prostatecancer: a computer simulation. J Urol. 2012;188(3):974-80.
• 3. Kasabwala K, Patel N, Cricco-Lizza E, et al. The Learning Curve for Magnetic Resonance Imaging/Ultrasound Fusion-guided Prostate Biopsy . Eur Urol Oncol. 2019;2(2):135-140.
• 4. Puech P, Potiron E, Lemaitre L, et al. Dynamic contrast-enhanced-magnetic resonance imaging evaluation of intraprostatic prostatecancer: correlation with radical prostatectomy specimens. Urology 2009;74(5):1094-9.
• 5. Kvale R, Moller B, Wahlqvist R, et al. Concordance between Gleason scores of needle biopsies and radical prostatectomy specimens: a population-based study. BJU Int 2009;103:1647–54.
• 6. Draulans C, Everaerts W, Isebaert S, et al. Impact of MRI on prostate cancer staging and EAU risk classification. Urology. 2019 Apr 30. pii: S0090-4295(19)30386-3.
• 7. Steiger P, Thoeny HC. Prostate MRI based on PI-RADS version 2: how we review and report. Cancer Imaging az. 2016;16(1):9.
• 8. Futterer JJ, Briganti A, De Visschere P, et al. Can clinically significant prostate cancer be detected with multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging? A systematic review of the literature. Eur Urol 2015;68:1045–1053.
• 9. Vourganti S, Rastinehad A,YerramNK, et al. Multiparametricmagnetic resonance imaging and ultrasound fusion biopsy detect prostate cancer in patients with prior negative transrectal ultrasound biopsies. J Urol. 2012;188(6):2152–7.
• 10. Walton Diaz A, Hoang AN, Turkbey B, et al. Can magnetic resonance-ultrasound fusion biopsy improve cancer detection in enlarged prostates? J Urol. 2013;190(6):2020–5.
• 11. Nix JW, Turkbey B, Hoang A, et al. Very distal apical prostate tumours: identification on multiparametric MRI at 3 Tesla. BJU Int. 2012;110(11 Pt B):E694–700.
• 12. Volkin D, Turkbey B, Hoang AN, et al. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and subsequent MRI/ultrasonography fusion-guided biopsy increase the detection of anteriorly located prostate cancers. BJU Int. 2014;114(6b):E43–49.
• 13. Mottet N, van der Bergh R.C.N, Briers E, et al. Prostate Cancer. EAU Guideline 2019.
• 14. Rosenkrantz AB, Verma S, Choyke P, et al. Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Magnetic Resonance Imaging Targeted Biopsy in Patients with a Prior Negative Biopsy: A Consensus Statement by AUA and SAR. J. Urol. 2016;196(6):1613-1618.
• 15. Vourganti S, Starkweather N, Wojtowycz A. MR/US Fusion Technology: What Makes It Tick? Curr Urol Rep. 2017;18(3):20.
• 16. Sarkar S, Verma S. MR Imaging-Targeted Prostate Biopsies. Radiol Clin North Am. 2018;56(2):289-300.
• 17. Murphy IG, NiMhurchu E, Gibney RG, McMahon CJ. MRI-directed cognitive fusion-guided biopsy of the anterior prostate tumors. Diagn Interv Radiol. 2017;23(2):87-93.
• 18. Brown AM, Elbuluk O, Mertan F, et al. Recent advances in image-guided targeted prostate biopsy. Abdom Imaging. 2015;40(6):1788-99.
• 19. Haffner J, Lemaitre L, Puech P, et al. Role of magnetic resonance imaging before initial biopsy: comparison of magnetic resonance imaging-targeted and systematic biopsy for significant prostate cancer detection. BJU Int 2011;108(8, Pt 2):E171–E178.
• 20. Wysock JS, Rosenkrantz AB, Huang WC, et al. A prospective, blinded comparison of magnetic resonance (MR) imagingultrasound fusion and visual estimation in the performance of MR-targeted prostate biopsy: the PROFUS trial. Eur Urol. 2014;66(2):343–51. A novel trial demonstrating the merits of targeted biopsy in absence of fusion biopsy platforms.
• 21. American Urological Association (AUA) and Society of Abdominal Radiology (SAR) Joint Consensus Statement. Prostate MRI and MRI-Targeted Biopsy in Patients With Prior Negative Biopsy. Collaborative Initiative of the American Urological Association and the Society of Abdominal Radiology’s Prostate Cancer Disease-Focused Panel. https://c.ymcdn.com/sites/abdominalradiology.site-ym.com/resource/resmgr/Edu_DFPprostate/AUA-SAR.pdf. Accessed 6/25/2016.
• 22. Tay KJ, Gupta RT, Rastinehad AR, et al. Navigating MRI-TRUS fusion biopsy: optimizing the process and avoiding technical pitfalls. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther 2016;16(3):303–11.
• 23. Costa DN, Pedrosa I, Donato F Jr, Roehrborn CG, Rofsky NM. MR Imaging-Transrectal US Fusion for Targeted Prostate Biopsies: Implications for Diagnosis and Clinical Management. Radiographics. 2015;35(3):696-708.
• 24. Marks L, Young S, Natarajan S. MRI-ultrasound fusion for guidance of targeted prostate biopsy. Curr Opin Urol 2013;23(1):43–50.
• 25. Borkowetz A, Platzek I, Toma M et al. Comparison of systematic transrectal biopsy to transperineal MRI/ultrasound-fusion biopsy for the diagnosis of prostate cancer. BJU Int 2015; 116: 873–9.
• 26. Fiard G, Hohn N, Descotes JL, Rambeaud JJ, Troccaz J, Long JA. Targeted MRI-guided prostate biopsies forthe detection of prostate cancer: initial clinical experience with real-time 3-dimensional transrectal ultrasound guidance and magnetic resonance/transrectal ultrasound image fusion. Urology 2013; 81: 1372–8.
• 27. Gayet M, van der Aa A, Beerlage HP, Schrier BP, Mulders PF, Wijkstra H2,4. The value of magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasonography (MRI/US)-fusion biopsy platforms in prostate cancer detection: a systematic review. BJU Int. 2016;117(3):392-400.
• 28. Valerio M, Donaldson I, Emberton M, et al. Detection of clinically significant prostate cancer using magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion targeted biopsy: a systematic review. Eur Urol 2015;68(1):8–19.
• 29. Wegelin O, van Melick HH, Hooft L, et al. Comparing three different techniques for magnetic resonance imaging-targeted prostate biopsies: a systematic review of in-bore versus magnetic resonance imaging-transrectal ultrasound fusion versus cognitive registration. Is there a preferred technique? Eur Urol 2017;71(4):517–31.