PMID- 31791623
OWN - NLM
STAT- MEDLINE
DCOM- 20210527
LR  - 20210527
IS  - 1873-7560 (Electronic)
IS  - 0302-2838 (Linking)
VI  - 77
IP  - 4
DP  - 2020 Apr
TI  - Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging for the Detection of Clinically 
      Significant Prostate Cancer: What Urologists Need to Know. Part 3: Targeted 
      Biopsy.
PG  - 481-490
LID - S0302-2838(19)30775-4 [pii]
LID - 10.1016/j.eururo.2019.10.009 [doi]
AB  - BACKGROUND: After a lesion has been assessed adequately on multiparametric 
      magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI), magnetic resonance (MR)-guided biopsy (MRGB) 
      is the logical next step. The choice of the MRGB technique, however, is 
      difficult. OBJECTIVE: To show the advantages and disadvantages of the three 
      commonly used MRGB techniques-MRI-ultrasound fusion MRGB (fus-MRGB), direct 
      in-bore MRGB (inbore-MRGB), and cognitive MRGB (cog-MRGB), and to determine when 
      each of the techniques can be used. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Based on 
      expert opinion and literature overview, the advantages, disadvantages, and 
      challenges of fus-MRGB, inbore-MRGB, and cog-MRGB are evaluated. Further, the 
      clinical setting of each biopsy strategy is assessed. SURGICAL PROCEDURE: Based 
      on expert opinion and literature data, the three biopsy procedures are evaluated, 
      and the important pros and cons are determined. MEASUREMENTS: The basic concept 
      of each biopsy technique is reviewed, which would result in a clinical 
      recommendation. This will be shown in individual patients. RESULTS AND 
      LIMITATIONS: The accompanying video shows how fus-MRGB and inbore-MRGB are 
      performed in our hospital. An important advantage of fus-MRGB is its generally 
      availability; however, it has fusion-error limitations. Although not supported by 
      evidence, inbore-MRGB seems to be better suited for smaller lesions, but is 
      rather expensive. Cog-MRGB is easy to use and inexpensive, but is more operator 
      dependent as it requires knowledge about both ultrasound and MR images. Readers 
      should be aware that our MRGB approach is largely based on expert opinion and, 
      where possible, supported by evidence. CONCLUSIONS: This article and the 
      accompanying video show different MRGB techniques. The advantages and 
      disadvantages of the three biopsy techniques, as well as the clinical setting in 
      which each biopsy strategy is being used in our hospital, are discussed. Fus-MRGB 
      is our first choice for prostate biopsy. Direct inbore-MRGB is used in difficult 
      lesions but is mainly used as a "problem solver" (eg, a negative biopsy with a 
      high suspicion for clinically significant prostate cancer). In our opinion, 
      cog-MRGB is best for sampling larger and diffuse lesions. PATIENT SUMMARY: This 
      third surgery in motion contribution shows our approach in magnetic resonance 
      (MR)-guided biopsy (MRGB). Fusion MRGB is our first choice for prostate biopsy. 
      In-bore MRGB is used in selected, difficult cases, mainly as a problem solver. In 
      our point of view, cognitive MRGB seems to be best for sampling larger lesions 
      and diffuse processes.
CI  - Copyright (c) 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
FAU - Venderink, Wulphert
AU  - Venderink W
AD  - Department of Radiology, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Center, Nijmegen, 
      The Netherlands.
FAU - Bomers, Joyce G
AU  - Bomers JG
AD  - Department of Radiology, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Center, Nijmegen, 
      The Netherlands.
FAU - Overduin, Christiaan G
AU  - Overduin CG
AD  - Department of Radiology, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Center, Nijmegen, 
      The Netherlands.
FAU - Padhani, Anwar R
AU  - Padhani AR
AD  - Paul Strickland Scanner Centre, Northwood, UK.
FAU - de Lauw, Gijs R
AU  - de Lauw GR
AD  - Department of Radiology, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Center, Nijmegen, 
      The Netherlands.
FAU - Sedelaar, Michiel J
AU  - Sedelaar MJ
AD  - Department of Radiology, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Center, Nijmegen, 
      The Netherlands.
FAU - Barentsz, Jelle O
AU  - Barentsz JO
AD  - Department of Radiology, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Center, Nijmegen, 
      The Netherlands. Electronic address: jelle.barentsz@radboudumc.nl.
LA  - eng
PT  - Journal Article
PT  - Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
PT  - Video-Audio Media
DEP - 20191130
PL  - Switzerland
TA  - Eur Urol
JT  - European urology
JID - 7512719
SB  - IM
CIN - Eur Urol. 2020 Apr;77(4):491-493. PMID: 31982194
MH  - Humans
MH  - Image-Guided Biopsy/*methods
MH  - Male
MH  - *Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging
MH  - Prostatic Neoplasms/*diagnostic imaging/*pathology
MH  - Urology/*methods
OTO - NOTNLM
OT  - Magnetic resonance-guided biopsy
OT  - Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging
OT  - Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System
OT  - Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2
OT  - Prostate biopsy
OT  - Prostate cancer
EDAT- 2019/12/04 06:00
MHDA- 2021/05/28 06:00
CRDT- 2019/12/04 06:00
PHST- 2019/04/25 00:00 [received]
PHST- 2019/10/18 00:00 [accepted]
PHST- 2019/12/04 06:00 [pubmed]
PHST- 2021/05/28 06:00 [medline]
PHST- 2019/12/04 06:00 [entrez]
AID - S0302-2838(19)30775-4 [pii]
AID - 10.1016/j.eururo.2019.10.009 [doi]
PST - ppublish
SO  - Eur Urol. 2020 Apr;77(4):481-490. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2019.10.009. Epub 2019 
      Nov 30.