Top

European Radiology

Published in:

Open Access 01-11-2018 | Interventional

Fast 3-T MR-guided transrectal prostate biopsy using an in-room tablet device for needle guide alignment: a feasibility study

Authors: Christiaan G. Overduin, Jan Heidkamp, Eva Rothgang, Jelle O. Barentsz, Frank de Lange, Jurgen J. Fütterer

Published in: European Radiology | Issue 11/2018

Abstract

Objectives

To assess the feasibility of adding a tablet device inside the scanner room to assist needle-guide alignment during magnetic resonance (MR)-guided transrectal prostate biopsy.

Methods

Twenty patients with one cancer-suspicious region (CSR) with PI-RADS score ≥ 4 on diagnostic multiparametric MRI were prospectively enrolled. Two orthogonal scan planes of an MR fluoroscopy sequence (~3 images/s) were aligned to the CSR and needle-guide pivoting point. Targeting was achieved by manipulating the needle-guide under MR fluoroscopy feedback on the in-room tablet device. Technical feasibility and targeting success were assessed. Complications and biopsy procedure times were also recorded.

Results

Needle-guide alignment with the in-room tablet device was technically successful in all patients and allowed sampling after a single alignment step in 19/20 (95%) CSRs (median size 14 mm, range: 4-45). Biopsy cores contained cancer in 18/20 patients. There were no per-procedural or post-biopsy complications. Using the tablet device, the mean time to first biopsy was 5.8 ± 1.0 min and the mean total procedure time was 23.7 ± 4.1 min.

Conclusions

Use of an in-room tablet device to assist needle-guide alignment was feasible and safe during MR-guided transrectal prostate biopsy. Initial experience indicates potential for procedure time reduction.

Key Points

• Performing MR-guided prostate biopsy using an in-room tablet device is feasible.

• CSRs could be sampled after a single alignment step in 19/20 patients.

• The mean procedure time for biopsy with the tablet device was 23.7 min.

Available only for authorised users

Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A (2016) Cancer statistics, 2016. CA Cancer J Clin 66:7–30. https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21332 CrossRefPubMed

Rabbani F, Stroumbakis N, Kava BR et al (1998) Incidence and clinical significance of false-negative sextant prostate biopsies. J Urol 159:1247–1250CrossRefPubMed

Serefoglu EC, Altinova S, Ugras NS et al (2013) How reliable is 12-core prostate biopsy procedure in the detection of prostate cancer? Can Urol Assoc J 7:E293–E298. https://doi.org/10.5489/cuaj.11224 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Djavan B, Milani S, Remzi M (2005) Prostate biopsy: who, how and when. An update. Can J Urol 12(Suppl 1):44-8-100

Roehl KA, Antenor JAV, Catalona WJ (2002) Serial biopsy results in prostate cancer screening study. J Urol 167:2435–2439CrossRefPubMed

De Rooij M, Hamoen EHJ, Fütterer JJ et al (2014) Accuracy of multiparametric MRI for prostate cancer detection: A meta-analysis. AJR Am J Roentgenol 202:343–351. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.13.11046 CrossRefPubMed

Fütterer JJ, Briganti A, De Visschere P et al (2015) Can clinically significant prostate cancer be detected with multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging? A systematic review of the literature. Eur Urol 68:1045–1053. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2015.01.013 CrossRefPubMed

Hata N, Jinzaki M, Kacher D et al (2001) MR imaging-guided prostate biopsy with surgical navigation software: device validation and feasibility. Radiology 220:263–268CrossRefPubMed

Hambrock T, Somford DM, Hoeks C et al (2010) Magnetic resonance imaging guided prostate biopsy in men with repeat negative biopsies and increased prostate specific antigen. J Urol 183:520–527. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2009.10.022 CrossRefPubMed

10.

Anastasiadis AG, Lichy MP, Nagele U et al (2006) MRI-Guided Biopsy of the Prostate Increases Diagnostic Performance in Men with Elevated or Increasing PSA Levels after Previous Negative TRUS Biopsies. Eur Urol 50(4):738–749. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2006.03.007 CrossRefPubMed

11.

Beyersdorff D, Winkel A, Hamm B et al (2005) MR Imaging – guided Prostate Biopsy with a Closed MR Unit at 1.5 T:Initial Results. Radiology 234:576–581. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2342031887 CrossRefPubMed

12.

Hambrock T, Futterer JJ, Huisman HJ et al (2008) Thirty-two-channel coil 3T magnetic resonance-guided biopsies of prostate tumor suspicious regions identified on multimodality 3T magnetic resonance imaging: technique and feasibility. Invest Radiol 43(10):686–694CrossRefPubMed

13.

Overduin CG, Fütterer JJ, Barentsz JO (2013) MRI-Guided Biopsy for Prostate Cancer Detection: A Systematic Review of Current Clinical Results. Curr Urol Rep 14:209–213. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11934-013-0323-z CrossRefPubMed

14.

Weinreb JC, Barentsz JO, Choyke PL et al (2016) PI-RADS Prostate Imaging - Reporting and Data System: 2015, Version 2. Eur Urol 69:16–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2015.08.052 CrossRefPubMed

15.

ASTM F2052-15 (2015) Standard test method for measurement of magnetically induced displacement force on medical devices in the magnetic resonance environment. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA. https://www.astm.org. Accessed 15 Sept 2017

16.

ASTM F2119-07 (2013) Standard test method for evaluation of MR image artifacts from passive implants. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA. https://www.astm.org. Accessed 15 Sept 2017

17.

Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien P-A (2004) Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg 240:205–213CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

18.

Stoianovici D, Song D, Petrisor D et al (2007) “MRI Stealth” robot for prostate interventions. Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol 16:241–248. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645700701520735 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

19.

Srimathveeravalli G, Kim C, Petrisor D et al (2014) MRI-safe robot for targeted transrectal prostate biopsy: Animal experiments. BJU Int 113:977–985. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.12335 CrossRefPubMed

20.

Yakar D, Schouten MG, Bosboom DGH et al (2011) Feasibility of a pneumatically actuated MR-compatible robot for transrectal prostate biopsy guidance. Radiology 260:241–247. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.11101106 CrossRefPubMed

21.

Zamecnik P, Schouten MG, Krafft AJ et al (2014) Automated real-time needle-guide tracking for fast 3-T MR-guided transrectal prostate biopsy: a feasibility study. Radiology 273:879–886. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.14132067 CrossRefPubMed

22.

Rube MA, Holbrook AB, Cox BF et al (2015) Wireless mobile technology to improve workflow and feasibility of MR-guided percutaneous interventions. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg 10:665–676. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11548-014-1109-6 CrossRefPubMed

23.

Bomers JGR, Bosboom DGH, Tigelaar GH et al (2016) Feasibility of a 2nd generation MR-compatible manipulator for transrectal prostate biopsy guidance. Eur Radiol:1–7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-016-4504-2 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

24.

Logan JK, Rais-Bahrami S, Turkbey B et al (2014) Current status of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and ultrasonography fusion software platforms for guidance of prostate biopsies. BJU Int 114:641–652. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.12593 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

25.

Valerio M, Donaldson I, Emberton M et al (2015) Detection of clinically significant prostate cancer using magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion targeted biopsy: A systematic review. Eur Urol 68:8–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2014.10.026 CrossRefPubMed

Title: Fast 3-T MR-guided transrectal prostate biopsy using an in-room tablet device for needle guide alignment: a feasibility study
Authors: Christiaan G. Overduin
Jan Heidkamp
Eva Rothgang
Jelle O. Barentsz
Frank de Lange
Jurgen J. Fütterer
Publication date: 01-11-2018
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in: European Radiology / Issue 11/2018
Print ISSN: 0938-7994
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1084
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-018-5497-9

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Fast 3-T MR-guided transrectal prostate biopsy using an in-room tablet device for needle guide alignment: a feasibility study

Abstract

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Key Points

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Key Points

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 11/2018

How many versus how much: comprehensive haemodynamic evaluation of partial anomalous pulmonary venous connection by cardiac MRI

CT colonography: size reduction of submerged colorectal polyps due to electronic cleansing and CT-window settings

Sagittal balance measures are more reproducible when measured in 3D vs in 2D using full-body EOS® images

Improved visualisation of early cerebral infarctions after endovascular stroke therapy using dual-energy computed tomography oedema maps

Feasibility of balanced steady-state free precession sequence at 1.5T for the evaluation of hepatic steatosis in obese children and adolescents

4D ASL-based MR angiography for visualization of distal arteries and leptomeningeal collateral vessels in moyamoya disease: a comparison of techniques