Skip to main content
Log in

Lokale Bildgebung der Prostata

Imaging of the prostate

Der Urologe Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Zusammenfassung

In den letzten Jahren wurden neue Verfahren für die Bildgebung der Prostata entwickelt, um die Diagnostik des Prostatakarzinoms zu verbessern. Hierbei wurde v. a. der transrektale Ultraschall (TRUS) zum sog. „enhanced ultrasound“ weiterentwickelt. Die Elastographie zeigt in mehreren Studien gute Fähigkeiten, sowohl Karzinomherde in der Prostata zu identifizieren, als auch die Detektionsrate einer randomisierten Biopsie um bis zu 10 % absolut zu verbessern. Der Kontrastmittelultraschall zeigt unterschiedliche Ergebnisse in den publizierten Studien, mit z. T. verbesserten Detektionsraten und z. T. unveränderten Detektionsraten im Vergleich zur randomisierten Biopsie. Das „online“ verfügbare ANNA/C-TRUS-System weist mit 6 gezielten Biopsien Detektionsraten auf, welche mit den publizierten Daten der randomisierten Sättigungsbiopsie vergleichbar sind. Direkte systematische Vergleiche zur randomisierten Biopsie stehen jedoch noch aus. Zum Histoscanningsystem ist aktuell die unzureichendste Datenlage verfügbar, denn es liegen noch keine Biopsiestudien vor. Multizentrische Studien sind für sämtliche Bildgebungsverfahren notwendig, um diese Verfahren in der klinischen Praxis als Standard zu etablieren.

Abstract

Recently several new technologies for prostate imaging have been developed. The aim of these technologies was to improve the diagnosis of prostate cancer. Especially the transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) has been refined to the so-called enhanced ultrasound, as regular grey scale TRUS has limited ability to identify cancer lesions in the prostate. In several studies elastography has shown good capability to identify cancer lesions in the prostate as well as to absolutely increase the detection rate of randomized biopsies by up to 10 %.. Contrast-enhanced ultrasound shows varying results in the published literature with increased detection rates on the one hand and unchanged detection rates relative to randomized biopsy on the other hand. The online available ANNA/C-TRUS system shows detection rates with six targeted biopsies that are comparable to the published detection rates of randomized saturation biopsies. Direct systematic comparison to randomized biopsies is missing. The Histoscanning system currently provides the poorest data as no biopsy studies are available. Multicenter trials are mandatory for all new imaging technologies in order to implement them as standard into clinical practice.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Abb. 1
Abb. 2
Abb. 3
Abb. 4
Abb. 5

Literatur

  1. Aigner F, Pallwein L, Junker D et al (2010) Value of real-time elastography targeted biopsy for prostate cancer detection in men with prostate specific antigen 1.25 ng/ml or greater and 4.00 ng/ml or less. J Urol 184:913–917

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Barr RG, Memo R, Schaub CR (2012) Shear wave ultrasound elastography of the prostate: initial results. Ultrasound Q 28:13–20

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. 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 

  4. 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 

  5. Brock M, Von Bodman C, Palisaar RJ et al (2012) The impact of real-time elastography guiding a systematic prostate biopsy to improve cancer detection rate: a prospective study of 353 patients. J Urol 187:2039–2043

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Brock M, Von Bodman C, Sommerer F et al (2012) 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 108:217–222

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Ganzer R, Brandtner A, Wieland WF et al (2012) Prospective blinded comparison of real-time sonoelastography targeted versus randomised biopsy of the prostate in the primary and re-biopsy setting. World J Urol 30:219–223

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. 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 

  9. Halpern EJ, Gomella LG, Forsberg F et al (2012) Contrast enhanced transrectal ultrasound for the detection of prostate cancer: a randomized, double-blind trial of dutasteride pretreatment. J Urol 188:1739–1745

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Halpern EJ, Mccue PA, Aksnes AK et al (2002) Contrast-enhanced US of the prostate with Sonazoid: comparison with whole-mount prostatectomy specimens in 12 patients. Radiology 222:361–366

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Heidenreich A, Bellmunt J, Bolla M et al (2011) EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. Part 1: screening, diagnosis, and treatment of clinically localised disease. Eur Urol 59:61–71

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Jung EM, Wiggermann P, Greis C et al (2012) First results of endocavity evaluation of the microvascularization of malignant prostate tumors using contrast enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) including perfusion analysis: first results. Clin Hemorheol Microcirc 52:167–177

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. 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 

  14. 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 

  15. Mitterberger MJ, Aigner F, Horninger W et al (2010) Comparative efficiency of contrast-enhanced colour Doppler ultrasound targeted versus systematic biopsy for prostate cancer detection. Eur Radiol 20:2791–2796

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Pallwein L, Mitterberger M, Pinggera G et al (2008) Sonoelastography of the prostate: comparison with systematic biopsy findings in 492 patients. Eur J Radiol 65:304–310

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. 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 

  18. Rorvik J, Halvorsen OJ, Servoll E et al (1994) Transrectal ultrasonography to assess local extent of prostatic cancer before radical prostatectomy. Br J Urol 73:65–69

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Salomon G, Kollerman 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 

  20. Salomon G, Spethmann J, Beckmann A et al (2012) Accuracy of HistoScanning for the prediction of a negative surgical margin in patients undergoing radical prostatectomy. BJU Int 110(11):1714–1720

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Sedelaar JP, Van Leenders GJ, Goossen TE et al (2002) Value of contrast ultrasonography in the detection of significant prostate cancer: correlation with radical prostatectomy specimens. Prostate 53:246–253

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Simmons LA, Autier P, Zat’ura F et al (2012) Detection, localisation and characterisation of prostate cancer by prostate HistoScanning. BJU Int 110:28–35

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Smeenge M, Mischi M, Laguna Pes MP et al (2011) Novel contrast-enhanced ultrasound imaging in prostate cancer. World J Urol 29:581–587

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Strunk T, Decker G, Willinek W et al (2012) Combination of C-TRUS with multiparametric MRI: potential for improving detection of prostate cancer. World J Urol 53(11):1663–1669

    Google Scholar 

  25. Sumura M, Shigeno K, Hyuga T et al (2007) Initial evaluation of prostate cancer with real-time elastography based on step-section pathologic analysis after radical prostatectomy: a preliminary study. Int J Urol 14:811–816

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Taverna G, Morandi G, Seveso M et al (2011) Colour Doppler and microbubble contrast agent ultrasonography do not improve cancer detection rate in transrectal systematic prostate biopsy sampling. BJU Int 108:1723–1727

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Trabulsi EJ, Sackett D, Gomella LG et al (2010) Enhanced transrectal ultrasound modalities in the diagnosis of prostate cancer. Urology 76:1025–1033

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Walz J, Graefen M, Chun FK et al (2006) High incidence of prostate cancer detected by saturation biopsy after previous negative biopsy series. Eur Urol 50:498–505

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. 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 

  30. Walz J, Marcy M, Pianna JT et al (2011) Identification of the prostate cancer index lesion by real-time elastography: considerations for focal therapy of prostate cancer. World J Urol 29:589–594

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Walz J, Thomassin J, Poizat F et al (2012) External validation of the ANNA/C-TRUS system regarding the correct identification of prostate cancer lesions in the diagnosis of prostate cancer. J Urol 187(Suppl)

Download references

Interessenkonflikt

Der korrespondierende Autor weist für sich und seine Koautoren auf folgende Beziehungen hin: JW: Reiskostenübernahmen Fresenius-Kabi, Hitachi Medical System; TL: Beratungstätigkeit Fresenius-Kabi.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to J. Walz.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Walz, J., Loch, T., Salomon, G. et al. Lokale Bildgebung der Prostata. Urologe 52, 490–496 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00120-012-3103-3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00120-012-3103-3

Schlüsselwörter

Keywords

Navigation