Comparison between “In-bore” MRI guided prostate biopsy and standard ultrasound guided biopsy in the patient with suspicious prostate cancer: Preliminary results

  • Daniele D’Agostino | dott.dagostino@gmail.com Department of Robotic Urological Surgery, Abano Terme Hospital, Abano Terme, Italy.
  • Federico Mineo Bianchi Department of Urology, University of Bologna, Italy.
  • Daniele Romagnoli Department of Robotic Urological Surgery, Abano Terme Hospital, Abano Terme, Italy.
  • Paolo Corsi Department of Robotic Urological Surgery, Abano Terme Hospital, Abano Terme, Italy.
  • Marco Giampaoli Department of Robotic Urological Surgery, Abano Terme Hospital, Abano Terme, Italy.
  • Riccardo Schiavina Department of Urology, University of Bologna, Italy.
  • Eugenio Brunocilla Department of Urology, University of Bologna, Italy.
  • Walter Artibani Department of Robotic Urological Surgery, Abano Terme Hospital, Abano Terme, Italy.
  • Angelo Porreca Department of Robotic Urological Surgery, Abano Terme Hospital, Abano Terme, Italy.

Abstract

Objectives: To evaluate the detection rate of prostate cancer (PCa) in patients who underwent to “in bore” Magnetic Resonance Imaging -guided prostate (MRI-GB) biopsy compared to the standard transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy (TRUS-GB).
Materials and methods: Between January 2017 and March 2015 a cohort of 39 consecutive patients was prospectively enrolled. All the patients underwent an "in-bore" guided MRI prostatic biopsy and subsequently ultrasound-guided standard prostate biopsy.
Results: Median age of patients was 65.5 years (SD ± 6.6), median total PSA serum level was 6.6 ng/ml (SD ± 4.1), median prostate total volume was 51.1 cc (SD ± 26.7). Thirty of 39 (76.9%) were biopsy-naïve patients while 7/39 (17.9%) had at least one previous negative random TRUS-GB; 2/39 (5.1%) patients were already diagnosed as PCa and were on active surveillance. In 18/39 (53.8%) men Pca was diagnosed; as regards the MRI-GB results related to the PI-RADS score, biopsies of PIRADS 3 lesions were positive in 5/18 cases (27.8%), while the number of positive cases of PI-RADS 4 and 5 lesions was 7/11 (63.6%) and 6/10 (60%)respectively. At the histological examination, 4/39 (10.3%) had a PCa ISUP grade group 1, 11/39 (28.2%) had a ISUP 2, 6/39(15.4%) had a ISUP grade group 3 and 2/39 (5.1%) had a ISUP 4-5.
Conclusions: MRI-GB represents a promising technique that may offer some of advantages compared to standard systematic TRUSGB. Our preliminary experience in MRI-GB resulted safe and feasible and represents a viable procedure for the diagnosis and characterization of PCa.

Dimensions

Altmetric

PlumX Metrics

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.
Published
2019-07-02
Info
Issue
Section
Original Papers - Oncology
Keywords:
Prostate cancer, MRI guided biopsy, Ultrasound guided biopsy
Statistics
  • Abstract views: 962

  • PDF: 366
How to Cite
D’Agostino, D., Mineo Bianchi, F., Romagnoli, D., Corsi, P., Giampaoli, M., Schiavina, R., Brunocilla, E., Artibani, W., & Porreca, A. (2019). Comparison between “In-bore” MRI guided prostate biopsy and standard ultrasound guided biopsy in the patient with suspicious prostate cancer: Preliminary results. Archivio Italiano Di Urologia E Andrologia, 91(2). https://doi.org/10.4081/aiua.2019.2.87

Most read articles by the same author(s)