Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Urology 1/2018

Open Access 01-12-2018 | Research article

A pilot study in intraparenchymal therapy delivery in the prostate: a comparison of delivery with a porous needle vs standard needle

Authors: Martin L. Brady, King Scott Coffield, Thomas J. Kuehl, Raghu Raghavan, V. O. Speights Jr, Belur Patel, Scott Wilson, Mike Wilson, Rick M. Odland

Published in: BMC Urology | Issue 1/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

New biologic therapies directly injected into the prostate are in clinical trials for prostatic diseases. There is a need to understand distribution of injected therapies as a function of prostatic anatomy, physiology, and device design.

Methods

A needle with a porous length of customizable-length was tested and its performance compared with a standard needle. Injections of magnetic resonance contrast reagent were placed into ex-vivo human prostates after surgical excision in standard of care therapy for invasive bladder cancer patients. Magnetic resonance images were acquired using sequences to quantify volume delivered, distributed, and backflow.

Results

Magnetic resonance images analysis revealed heterogeneity distribution with injection into the specimens. There was low resistance to flow along ductal pathways and high resistance to flow into glandular nodules and smooth muscle/fibrous parenchyma. Data confirm previous studies showing injection loss via urethra backflow, urethra, and prostatic ducts. Tissue fraction of dose was significantly higher with porous needle compared with standard needle (p = .03). We found that a greater volume of distribution divided by the amount infused (Vd/Vi) increased by 80% with the porous needle, though no statistically significant association due to small sample size.

Conclusions

This study demonstrated that prostatic tissue is anatomically heterogenic and limits distribution of needle injection. There is greater distribution in the ex-vivo prostate using a porous needle. The complexity of intra prostatic flow pathways suggests preoperative imaging and pre-treatment planning will enhance therapy.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Andersson KE. Intraprostatic injections for lower urinary tract symptoms treatment. Curr Opin Urol. 2015;25:12–8.CrossRefPubMed Andersson KE. Intraprostatic injections for lower urinary tract symptoms treatment. Curr Opin Urol. 2015;25:12–8.CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference Gulley JL, Heery CR, Madan RA, et al. Phase I study of intraprostatic vaccine administration in men with locally recurrent or progressive prostate cancer. Cancer Immunol Immunother. 2013;62:1521–31.CrossRefPubMed Gulley JL, Heery CR, Madan RA, et al. Phase I study of intraprostatic vaccine administration in men with locally recurrent or progressive prostate cancer. Cancer Immunol Immunother. 2013;62:1521–31.CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Nair SM, Pimentel MA, Gilling PI. Evolving and investigational therapies for benign prostatic hyperplasia. Can J Urol. 2015;22(Suppl 1):82–7.PubMed Nair SM, Pimentel MA, Gilling PI. Evolving and investigational therapies for benign prostatic hyperplasia. Can J Urol. 2015;22(Suppl 1):82–7.PubMed
4.
go back to reference Brady M, Raghavan R, Chen Z, Broaddus W. Quantifying fluid infusions and tissue expansion in brain. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 2011;58:2228–37.CrossRef Brady M, Raghavan R, Chen Z, Broaddus W. Quantifying fluid infusions and tissue expansion in brain. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 2011;58:2228–37.CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Deoni SCL, Peters TM, Rutt BK. Rapid combined T1 and T2 mapping using gradient recalled acquisition in the steady state. Magn Reson Med. 2003;49:515–26.CrossRefPubMed Deoni SCL, Peters TM, Rutt BK. Rapid combined T1 and T2 mapping using gradient recalled acquisition in the steady state. Magn Reson Med. 2003;49:515–26.CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Deoni SCL, Peters TM, Rutt BK. Determination of optimal angles for variable nutation proton magnetic spin-lattice, T1, and spin-spin, T2, relaxation times measurement. Magn Reson Med. 2004;51:194–9.CrossRefPubMed Deoni SCL, Peters TM, Rutt BK. Determination of optimal angles for variable nutation proton magnetic spin-lattice, T1, and spin-spin, T2, relaxation times measurement. Magn Reson Med. 2004;51:194–9.CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Chowning SL, Susil RC, Krieger A, Fichtinger G, Whitcomb LL, Atalar E. A preliminary analysis and model of prostate injection distributions. Prostate. 2006;66:344–57.CrossRefPubMed Chowning SL, Susil RC, Krieger A, Fichtinger G, Whitcomb LL, Atalar E. A preliminary analysis and model of prostate injection distributions. Prostate. 2006;66:344–57.CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Wang J, Qiu M, Constable RT. In vivo method for correcting transmit/receive nonuniformities with phased array coils. Magnc Reson Med. 2005;53:666–74.CrossRef Wang J, Qiu M, Constable RT. In vivo method for correcting transmit/receive nonuniformities with phased array coils. Magnc Reson Med. 2005;53:666–74.CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Raghavan R, Mikaeilian S, Brady M, Chen ZJ. Fluid infusions from catheters into elastic tissue: I. Azimuthally symmetric backflow in homogeneous media. Phys Med Biol. 2010;55:281–304.CrossRefPubMed Raghavan R, Mikaeilian S, Brady M, Chen ZJ. Fluid infusions from catheters into elastic tissue: I. Azimuthally symmetric backflow in homogeneous media. Phys Med Biol. 2010;55:281–304.CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference King BJ, Mann-Gow TK, Kida M, Plante MK, Perrapato SD, Zvara P. Intraprostatic ethanol diffusion: comparison of two injection methods using ex vivo human prostates. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2015;18:237–41.CrossRefPubMed King BJ, Mann-Gow TK, Kida M, Plante MK, Perrapato SD, Zvara P. Intraprostatic ethanol diffusion: comparison of two injection methods using ex vivo human prostates. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2015;18:237–41.CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference King BJ, Plante MK, Kida M, Mann-Gow TK, Odland R, Zvara P. Comparison of intraprostatic ethanol diffusion using a microporous hollow fiber catheter versus a standard needle. J Urol. 2012;187:1898–902.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral King BJ, Plante MK, Kida M, Mann-Gow TK, Odland R, Zvara P. Comparison of intraprostatic ethanol diffusion using a microporous hollow fiber catheter versus a standard needle. J Urol. 2012;187:1898–902.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Metadata
Title
A pilot study in intraparenchymal therapy delivery in the prostate: a comparison of delivery with a porous needle vs standard needle
Authors
Martin L. Brady
King Scott Coffield
Thomas J. Kuehl
Raghu Raghavan
V. O. Speights Jr
Belur Patel
Scott Wilson
Mike Wilson
Rick M. Odland
Publication date
01-12-2018
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Urology / Issue 1/2018
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2490
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12894-018-0378-8

Other articles of this Issue 1/2018

BMC Urology 1/2018 Go to the issue