Developments in MRI-targeted prostate biopsy. Issue 1 (January 2020)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Norris, Joseph M.; Kinnaird, Adam; Margolis, Daniel J.; Padhani, Anwar R.; Walz, Jochen; Kasivisvanathan, Veeru
• Is Part Of: Current opinion in urology. Volume 30:Issue 1(2020:Jan.)
• Publication Date: 2020-01
• Subjects: biparametric MRI -- focal saturation -- fusion biopsy -- multiparametric MRI -- prostate cancer -- targeted biopsy; Urology -- Periodicals; Review Literature -- Bibliography; Review Literature -- Periodicals; Male Urogenital Diseases -- Bibliography; Male Urogenital Diseases -- Periodicals; Female Urogenital Diseases -- Bibliography; Female Urogenital Diseases -- Periodicals; Urologic Diseases -- Bibliography; Urologic Diseases -- Periodicals; Periodicals; 616.6005
• DOI: 10.1097/MOU.0000000000000683
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1473-6586

Abstract

Abstract : Purpose of review: MRI-targeted prostate biopsy may be an attractive alternative to systematic biopsy for diagnosing clinically significant prostate cancer. In this narrative review, we discuss the new developments that have occurred in the advancement of MRI-targeted prostate biopsy, over the past 24 months. Recent findings: MRI-targeted biopsy offers enhanced diagnostic accuracy, when compared with the current standard of care of systematic transrectal ultrasound-guided (TRUS) biopsy, by decreasing the overall number of biopsies needed, maintaining or improving significant prostate cancer detection, and reducing the detection of clinically insignificant prostate cancer. The necessity of combining systematic prostate biopsy with MRI-targeted biopsy is still debated. The use of MRI--ultrasound fusion systems for lesion-targeting is promising for optimizing significant cancer detection, but recent evidence suggests that additional cognitive biopsy cores are still useful in detecting additional cancers. Summary: MRI-targeted biopsy in selected men with positive MRI offers a number of benefits over systematic biopsy in all men, and as such, may emerge as the new standard of care for the diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer.