Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

ACC 2024 Congress

Catch up on all the top stories and latest evidence in cardiology research with our ACC 2024 Congress hub page.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
European Radiology
Published in: European Radiology 12/2010

01-12-2010 | Ultrasound

Comparative efficiency of contrast-enhanced colour Doppler ultrasound targeted versus systematic biopsy for prostate cancer detection

Authors: Michael Josef Mitterberger, Friedrich Aigner, Wolfgang Horninger, Hanno Ulmer, Silvio Cavuto, Ethan J. Halpern, Ferdinand Frauscher

Published in: European Radiology | Issue 12/2010

Login to get access

Abstract

Objective

To compare the efficiency of contrast-enhanced colour Doppler ultrasound (CECD-US) targeted biopsy versus systematic biopsy (SB) for PCa detection in 1,776 men.

Methods

Retrospective, single-centre, diagnostic accuracy study from 2002 until 2006 in 1,776 male volunteers with a serum total PSA of 1.25 ng/ml or greater. In each patient five CECD-US targeted biopsies were performed in hypervascular areas in the peripheral zone during intravenous injection of a second-generation microbubble US contrast agent. Subsequently, another examiner performed ten SBs. The PCa detection rates for the two techniques were compared.

Results

Of 1,776 patients, cancer was detected in 559 patients (31%), including 476 of the 1,776 patients (27%) with CECD-US and 410 (23%) with SB (p < 0.001). The detection rate for CECD-US targeted biopsy cores (10.8% or 961 of 8,880 cores) was significantly better than for SB cores (5.1% or 910 of 17,760 cores, p < 0.001). Among patients with a positive biopsy for PCa, cancer was detected by CECD-US alone in 149 patients (27%) and by SB alone in 83 (15%) (p < 0.001).

Conclusion

This study represents the largest clinical trial to date, demonstrating a significant benefit of CECD-US targeted biopsy relative to SB.
Literature
1.
2.
3.
Holm HH, Gammelgaard J (1981) Ultrasonically guided precise needle placement in the prostate and the seminal vesicles. J Urol 125:385–387PubMed
4.
Giannarini G, Autorino R, di Lorenzo G (2009) Saturation biopsy of the prostate: why saturation does not saturate. Eur Urol 56:619–621CrossRefPubMed
5.
Scattoni V, Zlotta A, Montironi R et al (2007) Extended and saturation prostatic biopsy in the diagnosis and characterisation of prostate cancer: a critical analysis of the literature. Eur Urol 52:1309–1322CrossRefPubMed
6.
Scattoni V, Raber M, Abdollah F et al (2010) Biopsy schemes with the fewest cores for detecting 95% of the prostate cancers detected by a 24-core biopsy. Eur Urol 57:1–8CrossRefPubMed
7.
Presti JC Jr (2009) Repeat prostate biopsy—when, where, and how. Urol Oncol 27:312–314PubMed
8.
Presti J Jr (2008) Does the yield of prostate cancer biopsy and repeat biopsy justify the frequency of their use? Nat Clin Pract Urol 5:246–247CrossRefPubMed
9.
10.
Pallwein L, Mitterberger M, Gradl J et al (2007) Value of contrast-enhanced ultrasound and elastography in imaging of prostate cancer. Curr Opin Urol 17:39–47CrossRefPubMed
11.
Aigner F, Pallwein L, Mitterberger M et al (2009) Contrast-enhanced ultrasonography using cadence-contrast pulse sequencing technology for targeted biopsy of the prostate. BJU Int 103:458–463CrossRefPubMed
12.
Linden RA, Trabulsi EJ, Forsberg F et al (2007) Contrast enhanced ultrasound flash replenishment method for directed prostate biopsies. J Urol 178:2354–2358CrossRefPubMed
13.
Yakar D, Hambrock T, Hoeks C et al (2008) Magnetic resonance-guided biopsy of the prostate: feasibility, technique, and clinical applications. Top Magn Reson Imaging 19:291–295CrossRefPubMed
14.
Ismail M, Gomella LG (2001) Ultrasound for prostate imaging and biopsy. Curr Opin Urol 11:471–477CrossRefPubMed
15.
Pallwein L, Mitterberger M, Pelzer A et al (2008) Ultrasound of prostate cancer: recent advances. Eur Radiol 18:707–715CrossRefPubMed
16.
Mitterberger M, Horninger W, Pelzer A et al (2007) A prospective randomized trial comparing contrast-enhanced targeted versus systematic ultrasound guided biopsies: impact on prostate cancer detection. Prostate 67:1537–1542CrossRefPubMed
17.
Mitterberger M, Pinggera GM, Horninger W, Bartsch G, Strasser H, Schäfer G, Brunner A, Halpern EJ, Gradl J, Pallwein L, Frauscher F (2007) Comparison of contrast enhanced color Doppler targeted biopsy to conventional systematic biopsy: impact on Gleason score. J Urol 178:464–468CrossRefPubMed
18.
Mitterberger M, Pelzer A, Colleselli D et al (2007) Contrast-enhanced ultrasound for diagnosis of prostate cancer and kidney lesions. Eur J Radiol 64:231–238CrossRefPubMed
19.
Ashley RA, Inman BA, Routh JC et al (2008) Reassessing the diagnostic yield of saturation biopsy of the prostate. Eur Urol 53:976–981CrossRefPubMed
20.
21.
Hata N, Jinzaki M, Kacher D et al (2001) MR imaging-guided prostate biopsy with surgical navigation software: device validation and feasibility. Radiology 220:263–268PubMed
22.
Frauscher F, Klauser A, Volgger H et al (2002) Comparison of contrast enhanced color Doppler targeted biopsy with conventional systematic biopsy: impact on prostate cancer detection. J Urol 167:1648–1652CrossRefPubMed
23.
Pelzer A, Bektic J, Berger AP et al (2005) Prostate cancer detection in men with prostate specific antigen 4 to 10 ng/ml using a combined approach of contrast enhanced color Doppler targeted and systematic biopsy. J Urol 173:1926–1929CrossRefPubMed
24.
Halpern EJ, Ramey JR, Strup SE et al (2005) Detection of prostate carcinoma with contrast-enhanced sonography using intermittent harmonic imaging. Cancer 104:2373–2383CrossRefPubMed
25.
Wink M, Frauscher F, Cosgrove D et al (2008) Contrast-enhanced ultrasound and prostate cancer; a multicentre European research coordination project. Eur Urol 54:982–992CrossRefPubMed
26.
Colleselli D, Bektic J, Schaefer G et al (2007) The influence of prostate volume on prostate cancer detection using a combined approach of contrast-enhanced ultrasonography-targeted and systematic grey-scale biopsy. BJU Int 100:1264–1267CrossRefPubMed
27.
Lagakos SW (2006) The challenge of subgroup analyses—reporting without distorting. N Engl J Med 354:1667–1669CrossRefPubMed
28.
Heijmink SW, Barentsz JO (2007) Contrast-enhanced versus systematic transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate cancer detection: an overview of techniques and a systematic review. Eur J Radiol 63:310–316CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Comparative efficiency of contrast-enhanced colour Doppler ultrasound targeted versus systematic biopsy for prostate cancer detection
Authors
Michael Josef Mitterberger
Friedrich Aigner
Wolfgang Horninger
Hanno Ulmer
Silvio Cavuto
Ethan J. Halpern
Ferdinand Frauscher
Publication date
01-12-2010
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
European Radiology / Issue 12/2010
Print ISSN: 0938-7994
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1084
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-010-1860-1

Other articles of this Issue 12/2010

European Radiology 12/2010 Go to the issue

Computed Tomography

Dual energy CT (DECT) of the liver: conventional versus virtual unenhanced images

Head and Neck

How safe is the use of ultrasound-guided cutting needle biopsy in the head and neck?

Experimental

Effect of CT scan protocols on x-ray-induced DNA double-strand breaks in blood lymphocytes of patients undergoing coronary CT angiography

Urogenital

ESUR guidelines: ovarian cancer staging and follow-up

Oncology

Dynamic contrast-enhanced CT in patients treated with sorafenib and erlotinib for non-small cell lung cancer: a new method of monitoring treatment?

Breast

Mammography and ultrasound in the evaluation of male breast disease