Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Multiparametrisches MRT, Elastographie, kontrastmittelverstärkter Ultraschall

Gibt es Indikationen mit verlässlichem diagnostischem Zugewinn vor Prostatastanzbiopsie?

Multiparametric MRI, elastography, contrastenhanced TRUS

Are there indications with reliable diagnostic advantages before prostate biopsy?

  • Übersichten
  • Published:
Der Urologe Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Zusammenfassung

Das Prostatakarzinom (PCA) ist das häufigste Malignom des Mannes und zeigt eine steigende Inzidenz. Allein in Deutschland sterben ca. 11.000 Männer/Jahr. Erfreulicherweise sinkt die Mortalität bei steigender Inzidenz als Zeichen einer Verbesserung der diagnostischen Methoden. Viele Innovationen im Bereich der Bildgebung des PCA können hilfreich bei der frühzeitigen Erkennung eines PCA sein. Die kontrastmittelunterstützte Sonographie, computerunterstützte Sonographie, die Elastographie und das multiparamterische Magnetresonanztomogramm (MRT) sind vielversprechende Methoden, welche zu einer Steigerung der PCA-Detektionsrate führen können. Die Wertigkeit dieser neuen innovativen Techniken bezüglich der Detektion eines PCA ist nicht abschließend geklärt und soll anhand aktueller Daten dargestellt werden.

Abstract

Prostate cancer (PCA) is the most common malignancy in men with an increasing incidence and is responsible for about 11,000 deaths per year in Germany. Fortunately, the mortality of PCA has decreased in recent years despite the rising incidence reflecting improvements in diagnostic methods. Many new innovations in imaging techniques for PCA are available and may be helpful in early detection of PCA. Contrast-enhanced sonography, computer-assisted sonography, elastography and multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) seem to be the most promising methods to increase the detection rate of PCA during diagnostic work-up. The value of these new innovative techniques concerning improvement in PCA detection is reviewed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Abb. 1
Abb. 2

Literatur

  1. Horwich A, Parker C, Bangma C, Kataja V (2010) ESMO Guidelines Working Group. Prostate cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol 21(Suppl 5):129–133

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Hegele A, Skrobek L, Schrader AJ (2012) Update uro-oncology: Scientific meetings 2011. Aktuelle Urol 43:1–7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Cooner WH, Mosley BR, Rutherford CL et al (1990) Prostate cancer detection in a clinical urological practice by ultrasonography, digital rectal examination and prostate specific antigen. J Urol 143:1146–1154

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Loch AC, Bannowsky A, Baeurle L et al (2007) Technical and anatomical essentials for transrectal ultrasound of the prostate. World J Urol 25:361–366

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Flanigan RC, Catalona WJ, Richie JP et al (1994) Accuracy of digital rectal examination and transrectal ultrasonography in localizing prostate cancer. J Urol 152:1506–1509

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Noguchi M, Stamey TA, McNeal JE, Yemoto CM (2001) Relationship between systematic biopsies and histological features of 222 radical prostatectomy specimens: lack of prediction of tumor significance for men with nonpalpable prostate cancer. J Urol 166:104–109

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Sadeghi-Nejad H, Simmons M, Dakwar G, Dogra V (2006) Controversies in transrectal ultrasonography and prostate biopsy. Ultrasound Q 22:169–175

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Scherr DS, Eastham J, Ohori M, Scardino PT (2002) Prostate biopsy techniques and indications: when, where, and how? Semin Urol Oncol 20:18–31

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Djavan B, Margreiter M (2007) Biopsy standards for detection of prostate cancer. World J Urol 25:11–17

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. AWMF (2011) Interdisziplinäre Leitlinie der Qualität S3 zur Früerkennung, Diagnose und Therapie der verschiedenen Stadien des Prostatakarzinoms, Vers. 2.0–1. Aktualisierung 2011, Empfehlung 3.11. AWMF, Düsseldorf

  11. Simon J, Kuefer R, Bartsch G Jr et al (2008) Intensifying the saturation biopsy technique for detecting prostate cancer after previous negative biopsies: a step in the wrong direction. BJU Int 102:459–462

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Stewart CS, Leibovich BC, Weaver AL, Lieber MM (2001) Prostate cancer diagnosis using a saturation needle biopsy technique after previous negative sextant biopsies. J Urol 166:86–91

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Borboroglu PG, Comer SW, Riffenburgh RH, Amling CL (2000) Extensive repeat transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy in patients with previous benign sextant biopsies. J Urol 163:158–162

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Zaytoun OM, Jones JS (2011) Prostate cancer detection after a negative prostate biopsy: lessons learnt in the Cleveland Clinic experience. Int J Urol 18:557–568

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Heijmink SW, Fütterer JJ, Strum SS et al (2011) State-of-the-art uroradiologic imaging in the diagnosis of prostate cancer. Acta Oncol 50(Suppl 1):25–38

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Dinter DJ, Weidner AM, Wenz F et al (2010) Imaging diagnostics of the prostate. Urologe A 49:963–975

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Loch T (2004) Computerized supported transrectal ultrasound (C-TRUS) in the diagnosis of prostate cancer. Urologe A 43:1377–1384

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Loch T (2007) Computerized transrectal ultrasound (C-TRUS) of the prostate: detection of cancer in patients with multiple negative systematic random biopsies. World J Urol 25:375–380

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Pelzer A, Bektic J, Berger AP et al (2005) Prostate cancer detection in men with prostate specific antigen 4 to 10 ng/ml using a combined approach of contrast enhanced color Doppler targeted and systematic biopsy. J Urol 173(6):1926–1929

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Aigner F, Pallwein L, Mitterberger M et al (2009) Contrast-enhanced ultrasonography using cadence-contrast pulse sequencing technology for targeted biopsy of the prostate. BJU Int 103:458–463

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Mitterberger M, Horninger W, Aigner F et al (2010) Contrast-enhanced colour Doppler-targeted vs a 10-core systematic repeat biopsy strategy in patients with previous high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia. BJU Int 105:1660–1662

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Wink M, Frauscher F, Cosgrove D et al (2008) Contrast-enhanced ultrasound and prostate cancer; a multicentre European research coordination project. Eur Urol 54:982–992

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Mitterberger M, Horninger W, Pelzer A et al (2007) A prospective randomized trial comparing contrastenhanced targeted versus systematic ultrasound guided biopsies: impact on prostate cancer detection. Prostate 67:1537–1542

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Taymoorian K, Thomas A, Slowinski T et al (2007) Transrectal broadband-Doppler sonography with intravenous contrast medium administration for prostate imaging and biopsy in men with an elevated PSA value and previous negative biopsies. Anticancer Res 27:4315–4320

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. AWMF (2011) Interdisziplinäre Leitlinie der Qualität S3 zur Früerkennung, Diagnose und Therapie der verschiedenen Stadien des Prostatakarzinoms, Vers. 2.0–1. Aktualisierung 2011, Empfehlungen 4.3–4.8. AWMF, Düsseldorf

  26. Loch T, Leuschner I, Genberg C et al (2000) Improvement of transrectal ultrasound. Artificial neural network analysis (ANNA) in detection and staging of prostatic carcinoma. Urologe A 39:341–347

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Grabski B, Baeurle L, Loch A et al (2011) Computerized transrectal ultrasound of the prostate in a multicenter setup (C-TRUS-MS): detection of cancer after multiple negative systematic random and in primary biopsies. World J Urol 29:573–579

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Braeckman J, Autier P, Garbar C et al (2008) Computer-aided ultrasonography (HistoScanning): a novel technology for locating and characterizing prostate cancer. BJU Int 101:293–298

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Braeckman J, Autier P, Soviany C et al (2008) The accuracy of transrectal ultrasonography supplemented with computer-aided ultrasonography for detecting small prostate cancers. BJU Int 102:1560–1565

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Kamoi K, Okihara K, Ochiai A et al (2008) The utility of transrectal real-time elastography in the diagnosis of prostate cancer. Ultrasound Med Biol 34:1025–1032

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Miyagawa T, Tsutsumi M, Matsumura T et al (2009) Real-time elastography for the diagnosis of prostate cancer: evaluation of elastographic moving images. Jpn J Clin Oncol 39:394–398

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Tsutsumi M, Miyagawa T, Matsumura T et al (2007) The impact of real-time tissue elasticity imaging (elastography) on the detection of prostate cancer: clinicopathological analysis. Int J Clin Oncol 12:250–255

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Eggert T, Khaled W, Wenske S et al (2008) Impact of elastography in clinical diagnosis of prostate cancer. A comparison of cancer detection between B-mode sonography and elastography-guided 10-core biopsies. Urologe A 47:1212–1217

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Brock M, Bodman C von, Sommerer F et al (2011) Comparison of real-time elastography with grey-scale ultrasonography for detection of organ-confined prostate cancer and extra capsular extension: a prospective analysis using whole mount sections after radical prostatectomy. BJU Int 108(8 Pt 2):217–222, doi:10.1111/j.1464-410X.2011.10209.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Walz J, Marcy M, Maubon T et al (2011) Real time elastography in the diagnosis of prostate cancer: Comparison of preoperative imaging and histology after radical prostatectomy. Prog Urol 21:925–931

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Salomon G, Köllerman J, Thederan I et al (2008) Evaluation of prostate cancer detection with ultrasound real-time elastography: a comparison with step section pathological analysis after radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 54:1354–1362

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Pallwein L, Mitterberger M, Struve P et al (2007) Real-time elastography for detecting prostate cancer: preliminary experience. BJU Int 100:42–46

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Seitz M, Shukla-Dave A, Bjartell A et al (2009) Functional magnetic resonance imaging in prostate cancer. Eur Urol 55:801–814

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Turkbey B, Mani H, Shah V et al (2011) Multiparametric 3 T prostate magnetic resonance imaging to detect cancer: histopathological correlation using prostatectomy specimens processed in customized magnetic resonance imaging based molds. J Urol 186:1818–1824

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Hegele A, Heverhagen J, Blazek et al (o J) Multiparametric MRT in prostate cancer – correlation with histopathological results after radical prostatectomy. (Unpublished data)

  41. Oto A, Yang C, Kayhan A et al (2011) Diffusion-Weighted and dynamic contrast-enhanced mri of prostate cancer: correlation of quantitative mr parameters with gleason score and tumor angiogenesis. AJR Am J Roentgenol 197:1382–1390

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Tanimoto A, Nakashima J, Kohno H et al (2007) Prostate cancer screening: the clinical value of diffusion-weighted imaging and dynamic MR imaging in combination with T2-weighted imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging 25:146–152

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Chen M, Dang HD, Wang JY et al (2008) Prostate cancer detection: comparison of T2-weighted imaging, diffusion-weighted imaging, proton magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging, and the three techniques combined. Acta Radiol 49:602–610

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Reinsberg SA, Payne GS, Riches SF et al (2007) Combined use of diffusion-weighted MRI and 1 H MR spectroscopy to increase accuracy in prostate cancer detection. AJR Am J Roentgenol 188:91–98

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Yoshida S, Kawakami S, Ishii C et al (2011) Diagnostic performance and optimal sequence of MRI in detecting prostate cancer. J Urol 185 (Suppl):338–339

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Lawrentschuk N, Fleshner N (2009) The role of magnetic resonance imaging in targeting prostate cancer in patients with previous negative biopsies and elevated prostate-specific antigen levels. BJU Int 103:730–733

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Sciarra A, Panebianco V, Ciccariello M et al (2010) Value of magnetic resonance spectroscopy imaging and dynamic contrast-enhanced imaging for detecting prostate cancer foci in men with prior negative biopsy. Clin Cancer Res 16:1875–1883

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Cheikh AB, Girouin N, Colombel M et al (2009) Evaluation of T2-weighted and dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI in localizing prostate cancer before repeat biopsy. Eur Radiol 19:770–778

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Comet-Batlle J, Vilanova Busquets J, Barcelo Vidal C et al (2011) Prostate cancer detection with MR spectroscopic imaging in the peripheral and transitional zones in patients with persistently elevated PSA with or without previous negative biopsies. Long term follow-up. Eur Urol 10(Suppl):854

    Google Scholar 

  50. Paticier G, Rigou G, Deminiere C et al (2011) Contrast-enhanced U.S:-guides biopsies following MRI in men with elevated PSA and previous negative biopsy. J Clin Oncol 29:(Suppl):15130

    Google Scholar 

  51. Sciarra A, Barentsz J, Bjartell A et al (2011) Advances in magnetic resonance imaging: how they are changing the management of prostate cancer. Eur Urol 59:962–977

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Zangos S, Eichler K, Thalhammer A et al (2010) MR-guided interventions of the prostate gland: a literature review. Rofo 182:947–953

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  53. Bonekamp D, Jacobs MA, El-Khouli R et al (2011) Advancements in MR imaging of the prostate: from diagnosis to interventions. Radiographics 31:677–703

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Hambrock T, Hoeks C, Hulsbergen-van de Kaa C et al (2012) Prospective assessment of prostate cancer aggressiveness using 3-T diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging-guided biopsies versus a systematic 10-core transrectal ultrasound prostate biopsy cohort. Eur Urol 61:177–184

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Hadaschik BA, Kuru TH, Tulea C et al (2011) A novel stereotactic prostate biopsy system integrating pre-interventional magnetic resonance imaging and live ultrasound fusion. J Urol 186:2214–2220

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Hoeks CM, Barentsz JO, Hambrock T et al (2011) Prostate cancer: multiparametric MR imaging for detection, localization, and staging. Radiology 261:46–66

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Interessenkonflikt

Der korrespondierende Autor gibt für sich und seine Koautoren an, dass kein Interessenkonflikt besteht.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Klinik für Urologie und Kinderurologie, Universitätsklinikum Gießen und Marburg, Philipps-Universität, Standort Marburg, Baldingerstraße, 35043, Marburg, Deutschland

    A. Hegele, L. Skrobek, R. Hofmann & P. Olbert

Authors
  1. A. Hegele
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. L. Skrobek
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. R. Hofmann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. P. Olbert
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to A. Hegele.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hegele, A., Skrobek, L., Hofmann, R. et al. Multiparametrisches MRT, Elastographie, kontrastmittelverstärkter Ultraschall. Urologe 51, 1270–1277 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00120-012-2874-x

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00120-012-2874-x

Schlüsselwörter

Keywords

Search

Navigation