5 research outputs found

    Clinical value of prostate segmentation and volume determination on MRI in benign prostatic hyperplasia

    Get PDF
    Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is a nonmalignant pathological enlargement of the prostate, which occurs primarily in the transitional zone. BPH is highly prevalent and is a major cause of lower urinary tract symptoms in aging males, although there is no direct relationship between prostate volume and symptom severity. The progression of BPH can be quantified by measuring the volumes of the whole prostate and its zones, based on image segmentation on magnetic resonance imaging. Prostate volume determination via segmentation is a useful measure for patients undergoing therapy for BPH. However, prostate segmentation is not widely used due to the excessive time required for even experts to manually map the margins of the prostate. Here, we review and compare new methods of prostate volume segmentation using both manual and automated methods, including the ellipsoid formula, manual planimetry, and semiautomated and fully automated segmentation approaches. We highlight the utility of prostate segmentation in the clinical context of assessing BPH

    Multiparametric MRI guidance in first-time prostate biopsies: what is the real benefit?

    Get PDF
    PURPOSEWith the increased recognition of the capabilities of prostate multiparametric (mp) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), attempts are being made to incorporate MRI into routine prostate biopsies. In this study, we aimed to analyze the diagnostic yield via cognitive fusion, transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided, and in-bore MRI-guided biopsies in biopsy-naive patients with positive findings for prostate cancer screening.METHODSCharts of 140 patients, who underwent transrectal prostate biopsy after the adaptation of mp-MRI into our routine clinical practice, were reviewed retrospectively. Patients with previous negative biopsies (n=24) and digital rectal examination findings suspicious for ≥cT3 prostate cancer (n=16) were excluded. T2-weighted imaging, diffusion-weighted imaging, and dynamic contrast-enhanced imaging were included in mp-MRI. Cognitive fusion biopsies were performed after a review of mp-MRI data, whereas TRUS-guided biopsies were performed blinded to MRI information. In-bore biopsies were conducted by means of real-time targeting under MRI guidance. RESULTSBetween January 2012 and February 2014, a total of 100 patients fulfilling the inclusion criteria underwent TRUS-guided (n=37), cognitive fusion (n=49), and in-bore (n=14) biopsies. Mean age, serum prostate specific antigen level, and prostate size did not differ significantly among the study groups. In TRUS-guided biopsy group, 51.3% were diagnosed with prostate cancer, while the same ratio was 55.1% and 71.4% in cognitive fusion and in-bore biopsy groups, respectively (P = 0.429). Clinically significant prostate cancer detection rate was 69.1%, 70.3%, and 90% in TRUS-guided, cognitive fusion, and in-bore biopsy groups, respectively (P = 0.31). According to histopathologic variables in the prostatectomy specimen, significant prostate cancer was detected in 85.7%, 93.3%, and 100% of patients in TRUS-guided, cognitive fusion, and in-bore biopsy groups, respectively. CONCLUSIONIn the first set of transrectal prostate biopsies, mp-MRI guidance did not increase the diagnostic yield significantly

    Image-guided focal therapy for prostate cancer

    Get PDF
    The adoption of routine prostate specific antigen screening has led to the discovery of many small and low-grade prostate cancers which have a low probability of causing mortality. These cancers, however, are often treated with radical therapies resulting in long-term side effects. There has been increasing interest in minimally invasive focal therapies to treat these tumors. While imaging modalities have improved rapidly over the past decade, similar advances in image-guided therapy are now starting to emerge—potentially achieving equivalent oncologic efficacy while avoiding the side effects of conventional radical surgery. The purpose of this article is to review the existing literature regarding the basis of various focal therapy techniques such as cryotherapy, microwave, laser, and high intensity focused ul­trasound, and to discuss the results of recent clinical trials that demonstrate early outcomes in patients with prostate cancer

    Natural history of small index lesions suspicious for prostate cancer on multiparametric MRI: recommendations for interval imaging follow-up

    Get PDF
    PURPOSEWe aimed to determine the natural history of small index lesions identified on multiparametric-magnetic resonance imaging (MP-MRI) of the prostate by evaluating lesion-specific pathology and growth on serial MP-MRI.MATERIALS AND METHODSWe performed a retrospective review of 153 patients who underwent a minimum of two MP-MRI sessions, on an institutional review board-approved protocol. Index lesion is defined as the lesion(s) with the highest cancer suspicion score based on initial MP-MRI of a patient, irrespective of size. Two study cohorts were identified: (1) patients with no index lesion or index lesion(s) ≤7 mm and (2) a subset with no index lesion or index lesion(s) ≤5 mm. Pathological analysis of the index lesions was performed following magnetic resonance/ultrasound fusion-guided biopsy. Growth rate of the lesions was calculated based on MP-MRI follow-up.RESULTSPatients with small index lesions measuring ≤7 mm (n=42) or a subset with lesions ≤5 mm (n=20) demonstrated either benign findings (86.2% and 87.5%, respectively) or low grade Gleason 6 prostate cancer (13.8% and 12.5%, respectively) on lesion-specific targeted biopsies. These lesions demonstrated no significant change in size (P = 0.93 and P = 0.36) over a mean imaging period of 2.31±1.56 years and 2.40±1.77 years for ≤7 mm and ≤5 mm index lesion thresholds, respectively. These findings held true on subset analyses of patients who had a minimum of two-year interval follow-up with MP-MRI.CONCLUSIONSmall index lesions of the prostate are pathologically benign lesions or occasionally low-grade cancers. Slow growth rate of these small index lesions on serial MP-MRI suggests a surveillance interval of at least two years without significant change

    Imaging and pathology findings after an initial negative MRI-US fusion-guided and 12-core extended sextant prostate biopsy session

    Get PDF
    PURPOSEA magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasonography (MRI-US) fusion-guided prostate biopsy increases detection rates compared to an extended sextant biopsy. The imaging characteristics and pathology outcomes of subsequent biopsies in patients with initially negative MRI-US fusion biopsies are described in this study.MATERIALS AND METHODSWe reviewed 855 biopsy sessions of 751 patients (June 2007 to March 2013). The fusion biopsy consisted of two cores per lesion identified on multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) and a 12-core extended sextant transrectal US (TRUS) biopsy. Inclusion criteria were at least two fusion biopsy sessions, with a negative first biopsy and mpMRI before each.RESULTSThe detection rate on the initial fusion biopsy was 55.3%; 336 patients had negative findings. Forty-one patients had follow-up fusion biopsies, but only 34 of these were preceded by a repeat mpMRI. The median interval between biopsies was 15 months. Fourteen patients (41%) were positive for cancer on the repeat MRI-US fusion biopsy. Age, prostate-specific antigen (PSA), prostate volume, PSA density, digital rectal exam findings, lesion diameter, and changes on imaging were comparable between patients with negative and positive rebiopsies. Of the patients with positive rebiopsies, 79% had a positive TRUS biopsy before referral (P = 0.004). Ten patients had Gleason 3+3 disease, three had 3+4 disease, and one had 4+4 disease.CONCLUSIONIn patients with a negative MRI-US fusion prostate biopsy and indications for repeat biopsy, the detection rate of the follow-up sessions was lower than the initial detection rate. Of the prostate cancers subsequently found, 93% were low grade (≤3+4). In this low risk group of patients, increasing the follow-up time interval should be considered in the appropriate clinical setting
    corecore