Accuracy analysis in MRI-guided robotic prostate biopsy

  • Helen Xu
  • Andras Lasso
  • Peter Guion
  • Axel Krieger
  • Aradhana Kaushal
  • Anurag K. Singh
  • Peter A. Pinto
  • Jonathan Coleman
  • Robert L. GrubbIII
  • Jean-Baptiste Lattouf
  • Cynthia Menard
  • Louis L. Whitcomb
  • Gabor Fichtinger
Original Article

Abstract

Purpose

To assess retrospectively the clinical accuracy of an magnetic resonance imaging-guided robotic prostate biopsy system that has been used in the US National Cancer Institute for over 6 years.

Methods

Series of 2D transverse volumetric MR image slices of the prostate both pre (high-resolution T2-weighted)- and post (low-resolution)- needle insertions were used to evaluate biopsy accuracy. A three-stage registration algorithm consisting of an initial two-step rigid registration followed by a B-spline deformable alignment was developed to capture prostate motion during biopsy. The target displacement (distance between planned and actual biopsy target), needle placement error (distance from planned biopsy target to needle trajectory), and biopsy error (distance from actual biopsy target to needle trajectory) were calculated as accuracy assessment.

Results

A total of 90 biopsies from 24 patients were studied. The registrations were validated by checking prostate contour alignment using image overlay, and the results were accurate to within 2 mm. The mean target displacement, needle placement error, and clinical biopsy error were 5.2, 2.5, and 4.3 mm, respectively.

Conclusion

The biopsy error reported suggests that quantitative imaging techniques for prostate registration and motion compensation may improve prostate biopsy targeting accuracy.

Keywords

Prostate biopsy Accuracy validation MRI-guidance  Image registration 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This work is supported by: US National Institutes of Health (NIH) 5R01CA111288-04 and 5R01EB002963-05, Canadian Ontario Graduate Scholarship (OGS), and Applied Cancer Research Unit program of Cancer Care Ontario with funds provided by the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care. Gabor Fichtinger was funded as a Cancer Ontario Research Chair. Conflict of interest    None.

References

  1. 1.
    American Cancer Society (2012) Cancer facts and figures. http://www.cancer.org/acs/groups/content/@epidemiologysurveilance/documents/document/acspc-031941.pdf. Accessed 9 Jan 2013
  2. 2.
    Tempany C, Straus S, Hata N, Haker S (2008) MR-guided prostate interventions. J Magn Reson Imaging 27:356–367PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kronz JD, Allan CH, Shaikh AA, Epstein JI (2001) Predicting cancer following a diagnosis of high grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia on needle biopsy: data on men with more than one follow-up biopsy. Am J Surg Pathol 25(8):1079–1085PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Wefer A, Hricak H, Vigneron D, Coakley F, Lu Y, Wefer J, Mueller-Lisse U, Carroll P, Kurhanewicz J (2000) Sextant localization of prostate cancer: comparison of sextant 16 biopsy, magnetic resonance imaging and magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging with step section histology. J Urol 163(2):400–404Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Taira AV, Merrick GS, Galbreath RW, Andreini H, Taubenslag W, Curtis R, Butler WM, Adamovich E, Wallner KE (2010) Performance of transperineal template-guided mapping biopsy in detecting prostate cancer in the initial and repeat biopsy setting. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 13(1):71–77PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Terris MK, Wallen EM, Stamey TA (1997) Comparison of mid-lobe versus lateral systematic sextant biopsies in the detection of prostate cancer. Urologia Internationalis 59(4):239–242PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Terris MK (2009) Strategies for repeat prostate biopsies. Curr Urol Rep 10(3):172–178PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Welch H, Fisher E, Gottlieb D, Barry M (2007) Detection of prostate cancer via biopsy in the medicare-SEER population during the PSA era. J Nat Cancer Inst 99(18):1395PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Futterer JJ, Barentsz JO (2012) MRI-guided and robotic-assisted prostate biopsy. Curr Opin Urol 22(4):316–319PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Krieger A, Susil R, Menard C, Coleman J, Fichtinger G, Atalar E, Whitcomb L (2005) Design of novel MRI compatible manipulator for image guided prostate interventions. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 52(2):306–331PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Krieger A, Iordachita I, Guion P, Singh AK, Kaushal A, Menard C, Pinto PA, Camphausen K, Fichtinger G, Whitcomb LL (2011) An MRI-compatible robotic system with hybrid tracking for MRI-guided prostate intervention. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 58(11):3049–3060PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kaplan I, Oldenburg NE, Meskell P, Blake M, Church P, Holupk EJ (2002) Real time MRI-ultrasound image guided stereotactic prostate biopsy. Magn Reson Imag 20:295–299CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hirose M, Bharatha A, Hata N, Zou KH, Warfield SK, Cormack RA, D’Amico A, Kikinis R, Jolesz FA, Tempany CMC (2002) Quantitative MR imaging assessment of prostate gland deformation before and during MR imaging-guided brachytherapy. Acad Radiol 9(8):906–912PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Reynier C, Troccaz J, Fourneret P, Dusserre A, Gay-Jeune C, Descotes JL, Bolla M, Giraud JY (2004) MRI/TRUS data fusion for prostate brachytherapy preliminary results. Med Phys 31(6):1568–1575PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Brock KK, Nichol AM, Ménard C, Moseley JL, Warde PR, Catton CN, Jaffray DA (2008) Accuracy and sensitivity of finite element model-based deformable registration of the prostate. Med Phys 35(9):4019–4025PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Alterovitz R, Goldberg K, Pouliot J, Hsu ICJ, Kim Y, Noworolski SM, Kurhanewicz J (2006) Registration of MR prostate images with biomechanical modeling and nonlinear parameter estimation. Med Phys 33(2):446–454PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Misra S, Macura K, Ramesh K, Okamura A (2009) The importance of organ geometry and boundary constraints for planning of medical interventions. Med Eng Phys 31(2):195–206PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Oguro S, Tokuda J, Elhawary H, Haker S, Kikinis R, Tempany C, Hata N (2009) MRI signal intensity based B-spline nonrigid registration for pre- and intraoperative imaging during prostate brachytherapy. J Magn Reson Imaging 30(5):1052–1058PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Fei B, Wheaton A, Lee Z, Duerk JL, Wilson DL (2002) Automatic MR volume registration and its evaluation for the pelvis and prostate. Phys Med Biol 47(5):823–838PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Xu H, Lasso A, Vikal S, Guion P, Krieger A, Kaushal A, Whitcomb LL, Fichtinger G, (2010) MRI-guided robotic prostate biopsy: a clinical accuracy validation. MICCAI 2010 Beijing, China LNCS 6363/2010, pp 383–391Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Tustison NJ, Gee JC (2009) N4ITK: Nick’s N3 ITK implementation for MRI bias field correction. Insight J. http://hdl.handle.net/10380/3053. Accessed 9 Jan 2013
  22. 22.
    Yoo TS, Ackerman MJ, Lorensen WE, Schroeder W, Chalana V, Aylward S, Metaxes D, Whitaker R (2002) Engineering and algorithm design for an image processing API: a technical report on ITK—the insight toolkit. Stud Health Technol Inform 85:586–592Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Pieper S, Halle M, Kikinis R (2004) 3D slicer. In: IEEE international symposium on biomedical imaging: from nano to macro, pp 632–635 Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Sang-Eun S, Cho NB, Iordachita II, Guion P, Fichtinger G, Kaushal A, Camphausen K, Whitcomb LL (2012) Biopsy needle artifact localization in MRI-guided robotic transrectal prostate intervention. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 59(7):1902–1911Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ploussard G, Epstein JI, Montironi R, Carroll PR, Wirth M, Grimm MO, Bjartell AS, Montorsi F, Freedland SJ, Erbersdobler A, van der Kwast TH (2011) The contemporary concept of significant versus insignificant prostate cancer. Euro Urol 60:291–303CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Tadayyon H, Lasso A, Kaushal A, Guion P, Fichtinger G (2011) Target motion tracking in MRI-guided transrectal robotic prostate biopsy. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 58(11):3135–3142PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© CARS 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Helen Xu
    • 1
  • Andras Lasso
    • 1
  • Peter Guion
    • 2
  • Axel Krieger
    • 3
  • Aradhana Kaushal
    • 2
  • Anurag K. Singh
    • 4
  • Peter A. Pinto
    • 2
  • Jonathan Coleman
    • 5
  • Robert L. GrubbIII
    • 6
  • Jean-Baptiste Lattouf
    • 7
  • Cynthia Menard
    • 8
  • Louis L. Whitcomb
    • 9
  • Gabor Fichtinger
    • 1
    • 9
  1. 1.Queen’s UniversityKingstonCanada
  2. 2.National Institutes of HealthBethesdaUSA
  3. 3.Children’s National Medical CenterWashingtonUSA
  4. 4.Rosewell Park Cancer InstituteBuffaloUSA
  5. 5.Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer CenterNew YorkUSA
  6. 6.Washington University in St. LouisSt. LouisUSA
  7. 7.Centre Hospitalier de L’Universite de MontrealMontrealCanada
  8. 8.Princess Margaret HospitalTorontoCanada
  9. 9.Johns Hopkins UniversityBaltimoreUSA

Personalised recommendations