European Association of Urology
Guidelines
Education & Events
Join our events Join our events
On-demand education Learn at your own pace
Scholarships Enrich your capabilities
Exchange Programmes Urology beyond Europe
Education Educational Platforms Talent Incubator Programme Accreditation
Science & Publications
Publications Our publications
Research & Science Passionate about research?
About
Who we are Our mission and history
Our Board and Offices How we work
Join the EAU Find out about membership
Vacancies Contact

10th SEEM: New developments in prostate biopsy

Fri, 24 Oct 2014
Prostate CancerBiopsyMRI

There are new options that may improve prostate tumour detection but the cautionary tone of current guidelines and prohibitive costs are among the factors that limit the widespread use of these new technologies in prostate cancer detection and biopsy.

Dr. Theodore Anagnostou (GR) spoke on new developments in the biopsy of prostate cancer (PCa) at the EAU 10th South Eastern European Meeting (SEEM) which opened today in Belgrade, Serbia, and gave an overview of the role of three-dimension mapping biopsy.

“Current clinical guidelines do not call for the use of MR-US (ultrasound) fusion targeted prostate biopsy. Moreover, the cost of prostate MRI and image-targted biopsy is commonly cited as a deterrent to adoption,” said Anagnostou.

He discussed the rational of pursuing appropriate biopsy techniques as he noted that changes in the management of PCa require a much more careful assessment of the prostate cancer.

Underscoring the evolution or changes in imaging techniques, he discussed multi-parametric ultra sound (US), or enhanced US in combination with elastography, which in some cases unfortunately carries a significant number of false negatives.

“Elastography is a promising tool with the potential to assist detection. However, the results are still inconsistent. Besides, elastography is not recommended for initial biopsies in the EAU Guidelines,” he added

The so-called new kid in the block, he said is the emergence of MRI. Currently there are three techniques available such as targeting within the magnet, superimposition, and the cognitive method which involves cognitive image registration. Anagnostou, however, pointed out that there are disadvantages of cognitive fusion due to human error when attempting to mentally fuse the MRI with TRUS.

Anagnostou also discussed MR-TRUS fusion. The fusion method can either be rigid fusion or elastic, but the latter is more sophisticated than rigid fusion since it attempts to compensate for changes in prostate shape or position.

He said: “These new techniques require fewer biopsies, but there are dilemmas with MRI, such as the query what constitutes an adequate MRI, or what are the hallmarks of positive lesions?”

In his key messages, Anagnostou underscored the following:

  • At face value the new image-based approach seems more expensive than conventional TRUS biopsy. However this does not take into account the repercussions of missed diagnoses on conventional biopsy or overtreatment because of uncertainty from systematic TRUS biopsy, and
  • Additional data are needed to conclusively prove that targeted biopsy will increase benefit and reduce harm before incorporation into guidelines.

Share this article

Suggested for you

See all
About EAU
  • Who we are
  • How we work
  • Become a member
Services
  • MyEAU
  • Congress registrations
  • Abstract submission
Media
  • EAU News
  • EAU Newsletter
  • EAU Press Releases
Contact
  • EAU Central Office
    PO Box 30016
    NL-6803 AA ARNHEM
    The Netherlands

  • Contact us
About EAU
Who we areHow we workBecome a member
Services
MyEAUCongress registrationsAbstract submission
Media
EAU NewsEAU NewsletterEAU Press Releases
Contact

EAU Central Office
PO Box 30016
NL-6803 AA ARNHEM
The Netherlands

Contact us
European Association of Urology
Privacy PolicyDisclaimer