European Radiology

, Volume 20, Issue 12, pp 2791–2796

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

  • Michael Josef Mitterberger
  • Friedrich Aigner
  • Wolfgang Horninger
  • Hanno Ulmer
  • Silvio Cavuto
  • Ethan J. Halpern
  • Ferdinand Frauscher
Ultrasound

DOI: 10.1007/s00330-010-1860-1

Cite this article as:
Mitterberger, M.J., Aigner, F., Horninger, W. et al. Eur Radiol (2010) 20: 2791. doi:10.1007/s00330-010-1860-1

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.

Keywords

Prostate cancer Prostate biopsy Ultrasound Contrast agents 

Copyright information

© European Society of Radiology 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michael Josef Mitterberger
    • 1
    • 6
  • Friedrich Aigner
    • 2
  • Wolfgang Horninger
    • 1
  • Hanno Ulmer
    • 3
  • Silvio Cavuto
    • 4
  • Ethan J. Halpern
    • 5
  • Ferdinand Frauscher
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of UrologyMedical University InnsbruckInnsbruckAustria
  2. 2.Department of RadiologyMedical University InnsbruckInnsbruckAustria
  3. 3.Department of Medical Statistics, Informatics and Health Economics (MSIG)Medical University InnsbruckInnsbruckAustria
  4. 4.National Cancer InstituteMilanItaly
  5. 5.Diagnostic Radiology, Jefferson Prostate Diagnostic CenterThomas Jefferson UniversityPhiladelphiaUSA
  6. 6.Department of UrologyMedical University InnsbruckInnsbruckAustria

Personalised recommendations