Retrospective comparison of direct in-bore magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-guided biopsy and fusion-guided biopsy in patients with MRI lesions which are likely or highly likely to be clinically significant prostate cancer - Scorecard - MDSpire

Retrospective comparison of direct in-bore magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-guided biopsy and fusion-guided biopsy in patients with MRI lesions which are likely or highly likely to be clinically significant prostate cancer

  • By

  • Wulphert Venderink

  • Marloes van der Leest

  • Annemarijke van Luijtelaar

  • Wendy J. M. van de Ven

  • Jurgen J. Fütterer

  • J. P. Michiel Sedelaar

  • Henkjan J. Huisman

  • September 4, 2017

  • 0 min

Share

Clinical Scorecard: Comparative Analysis of Direct In-Bore MRI-Guided Biopsy Versus Fusion-Guided Biopsy in Patients with MRI Detected Lesions Suggestive of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer

At a Glance

CategoryDetail
ConditionClinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa)
Key MechanismsMultiparametric MRI (mpMRI) enables accurate detection and localization of csPCa; targeted biopsy via direct in-bore MR-guided biopsy (MRGB) or MRI-TRUS fusion-guided biopsy (FGB) improves detection over systematic TRUS biopsy
Target PopulationMen with persistent clinical suspicion of prostate cancer despite negative TRUS biopsy and MRI-detected lesions (PI-RADS 4 or 5) ≥8 mm
Care SettingSpecialized radiology and urology centers with access to mpMRI and biopsy technologies

Key Highlights

  • mpMRI is recommended by EAU for men with persistent suspicion of PCa after negative TRUS biopsy due to improved detection of csPCa
  • MRGB offers accurate lesion targeting but is time-consuming, expensive, and less accessible; FGB is more widely available and less costly
  • FGB allows concurrent systematic TRUS biopsy to detect csPCa missed by targeted biopsy alone, but in this study only targeted biopsy was performed

Guideline-Based Recommendations

Diagnosis

  • Use mpMRI to detect and localize suspicious prostate lesions prior to biopsy
  • Consider targeted biopsy for lesions scored PI-RADS 4 or 5 and ≥8 mm in size
  • Perform biopsy in patients with prior negative TRUS biopsy but persistent clinical suspicion

Management

  • Select biopsy method based on lesion size, availability, and patient preference: MRGB for smaller or PI-RADS 3 lesions, FGB for larger lesions ≥8 mm
  • Perform targeted biopsy without anesthetics in both MRGB and FGB procedures
  • In FGB, use software-assisted image fusion with electromagnetic tracking and cognitive enhancement

Monitoring & Follow-up

  • Evaluate biopsy cores by dedicated uropathologists considering Gleason score ≥7 as clinically significant
  • Use PI-RADS scoring and lesion size to guide biopsy targeting and follow-up

Risks

  • MRGB is time-consuming (45–60 min) and expensive with limited accessibility
  • FGB may have registration inaccuracies due to prostate deformation and lacks needle position confirmation
  • Both procedures performed transrectally without anesthetics may cause patient discomfort

Patient & Prescribing Data

Patients with prior negative TRUS biopsy, PI-RADS 4 or 5 lesions ≥8 mm on mpMRI

FGB performed by less experienced radiologists can be as accurate as MRGB for lesions ≥8 mm; patient preference influences biopsy method selection

Clinical Best Practices

  • Use mpMRI with PI-RADS scoring to select patients and lesions for targeted biopsy
  • Apply software-assisted fusion with electromagnetic tracking and cognitive enhancement for FGB
  • Confirm lesion localization with additional MRI sequences during MRGB and verify needle placement
  • Consider lesion size and PI-RADS score when choosing between MRGB and FGB
  • Perform biopsies without anesthetics but monitor patient comfort
  • Evaluate biopsy specimens with experienced uropathologists aware of biopsy method and imaging findings

References

Original Source(s)

Related Content