Targeted Prostate Biopsy: How, When, and Why? A Systematic Review

Overview

Journal Diagnostics (Basel)

Specialty Radiology

Date 2024 Sep 14

PMID 39272649

Authors

Giacomo Rebez

Maria Barbiero

Franco Alchiede Simonato

Francesco Claps

Salvatore Siracusano

Rosa Giaimo

Gabriele Tulone

Fabio Vianello

Alchiede Simonato

Nicola Pavan

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Objective: Prostate cancer, the second most diagnosed cancer among men, requires precise diagnostic techniques to ensure effective treatment. This review explores the technological advancements, optimal application conditions, and benefits of targeted prostate biopsies facilitated by multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI).

Methods: A systematic literature review was conducted to compare traditional 12-core systematic biopsies guided by transrectal ultrasound with targeted biopsy techniques using mpMRI. We searched electronic databases including PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science from January 2015 to December 2024 using keywords such as "targeted prostate biopsy", "fusion prostate biopsy", "cognitive prostate biopsy", "MRI-guided biopsy", and "transrectal ultrasound prostate biopsy". Studies comparing various biopsy methods were included, and data extraction focused on study characteristics, patient demographics, biopsy techniques, diagnostic outcomes, and complications.

Conclusion: mpMRI-guided targeted biopsies enhance the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer while reducing unnecessary biopsies and the detection of insignificant cancers. These targeted approaches preserve or improve diagnostic accuracy and patient outcomes, minimizing the risks associated with overdiagnosis and overtreatment. By utilizing mpMRI, targeted biopsies allow for precise targeting of suspicious regions within the prostate, providing a cost-effective method that reduces the number of biopsies performed. This review highlights the importance of integrating advanced imaging techniques into prostate cancer diagnosis to improve patient outcomes and quality of life.

References

Skouteris V, Crawford E, Mouraviev V, Arangua P, Metsinis M, Skouteris M . Transrectal Ultrasound-guided Versus Transperineal Mapping Prostate Biopsy: Complication Comparison. Rev Urol. 2018; 20(1):19-25. PMC: 6003299. DOI: 10.3909/riu0785. View

Thomas M, Murali S, Simpson B, Freeman A, Kirkham A, Kelly D . Use of artificial intelligence in the detection of primary prostate cancer in multiparametric MRI with its clinical outcomes: a protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ Open. 2023; 13(8):e074009. PMC: 10445392. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-074009. View

Ahmed H, El-Shater Bosaily A, Brown L, Gabe R, Kaplan R, Parmar M . Diagnostic accuracy of multi-parametric MRI and TRUS biopsy in prostate cancer (PROMIS): a paired validating confirmatory study. Lancet. 2017; 389(10071):815-822. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)32401-1. View

Sathianathen N, Omer A, Harriss E, Davies L, Kasivisvanathan V, Punwani S . Negative Predictive Value of Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Detection of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer in the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Era: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Eur Urol. 2020; 78(3):402-414. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2020.03.048. View

Tu X, Liu Z, Chang T, Qiu S, Xu H, Bao Y . Transperineal Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Targeted Biopsy May Perform Better Than Transrectal Route in the Detection of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Clin Genitourin Cancer. 2019; 17(5):e860-e870. DOI: 10.1016/j.clgc.2019.05.006. View

Moldovan P, Van den Broeck T, Sylvester R, Marconi L, Bellmunt J, van den Bergh R . What Is the Negative Predictive Value of Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Excluding Prostate Cancer at Biopsy? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis from the European Association of Urology Prostate Cancer Guidelines Panel. Eur Urol. 2017; 72(2):250-266. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2017.02.026. View

Belue M, Turkbey B . Tasks for artificial intelligence in prostate MRI. Eur Radiol Exp. 2022; 6(1):33. PMC: 9339059. DOI: 10.1186/s41747-022-00287-9. View

Light A, Kanthabalan A, Otieno M, Pavlou M, Omar R, Adeleke S . The Role of Multiparametric MRI and MRI-targeted Biopsy in the Diagnosis of Radiorecurrent Prostate Cancer: An Analysis from the FORECAST Trial. Eur Urol. 2023; 85(1):35-46. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2023.09.001. View

Pepe P, Garufi A, Priolo G, Pennisi M . Transperineal Versus Transrectal MRI/TRUS Fusion Targeted Biopsy: Detection Rate of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer. Clin Genitourin Cancer. 2016; 15(1):e33-e36. DOI: 10.1016/j.clgc.2016.07.007. View

10.

Lenfant L, Seisen T, Roupret M, Pinar U, Mozer P . Unleashing the Power of Artificial Intelligence and Fusion Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Targeted Biopsy: Transforming Prostate Cancer Diagnosis. Eur Urol Oncol. 2023; 6(6):541-542. DOI: 10.1016/j.euo.2023.06.013. View

11.

Prince M, Foster B, Kaempf A, Liu J, Amling C, Isharwal S . In-Bore Versus Fusion MRI-Targeted Biopsy of PI-RADS Category 4 and 5 Lesions: A Retrospective Comparative Analysis Using Propensity Score Weighting. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2021; 217(5):1123-1130. DOI: 10.2214/AJR.20.25207. View

12.

Kaneko M, Fukuda N, Nagano H, Yamada K, Yamada K, Konishi E . Artificial intelligence trained with integration of multiparametric MR-US imaging data and fusion biopsy trajectory-proven pathology data for 3D prediction of prostate cancer: A proof-of-concept study. Prostate. 2022; 82(7):793-803. DOI: 10.1002/pros.24321. View

13.

Watts K, Frechette L, Muller B, Ilinksy D, Kovac E, Sankin A . Systematic review and meta-analysis comparing cognitive vs. image-guided fusion prostate biopsy for the detection of prostate cancer. Urol Oncol. 2020; 38(9):734.e19-734.e25. DOI: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2020.03.020. View

14.

Klotz L, Pavlovich C, Chin J, Hatiboglu G, Koch M, Penson D . Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Guided Transurethral Ultrasound Ablation of Prostate Cancer. J Urol. 2020; 205(3):769-779. DOI: 10.1097/JU.0000000000001362. View

15.

Pirola G, Castellani D, Orecchia L, Giulioni C, Gubbiotti M, Rubilotta E . Transperineal US-MRI Fusion-Guided Biopsy for the Detection of Clinical Significant Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Comparing Cognitive and Software-Assisted Technique. Cancers (Basel). 2023; 15(13). PMC: 10341093. DOI: 10.3390/cancers15133443. View

16.

Xue J, Qin Z, Cai H, Zhang C, Li X, Xu W . Comparison between transrectal and transperineal prostate biopsy for detection of prostate cancer: a meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis. Oncotarget. 2017; 8(14):23322-23336. PMC: 5410307. DOI: 10.18632/oncotarget.15056. View

17.

Porpiglia F, Manfredi M, Mele F, Cossu M, Bollito E, Veltri A . Diagnostic Pathway with Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging Versus Standard Pathway: Results from a Randomized Prospective Study in Biopsy-naïve Patients with Suspected Prostate Cancer. Eur Urol. 2016; 72(2):282-288. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2016.08.041. View

18.

Lee S . Infection after transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy. Korean J Urol. 2015; 56(5):346-50. PMC: 4426505. DOI: 10.4111/kju.2015.56.5.346. View

19.

Bhattacharya I, Khandwala Y, Vesal S, Shao W, Yang Q, Soerensen S . A review of artificial intelligence in prostate cancer detection on imaging. Ther Adv Urol. 2022; 14:17562872221128791. PMC: 9554123. DOI: 10.1177/17562872221128791. View

20.

Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel R, Laversanne M, Soerjomataram I, Jemal A . Global Cancer Statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN Estimates of Incidence and Mortality Worldwide for 36 Cancers in 185 Countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2021; 71(3):209-249. DOI: 10.3322/caac.21660. View