Advertisement

Required Accuracy of MR-US Registration for Prostate Biopsies

  • Wendy J. M. van de Ven
  • Geert J. S. Litjens
  • Jelle O. Barentsz
  • Thomas Hambrock
  • Henkjan J. Huisman
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6963)

Abstract

MR to TRUS guided biopsies can be a cost-effective solution for prostate biopsies. Prostate cancer can be detected on MRI and a biopsy can be directed towards a suspicious region. With the help of an accurate MR-US registration method the tumor can also be targeted under transrectal US guidance. For heterogeneous tumors, the needle should be guided towards the most aggressive part of the tumor. Not the tumor size, but the size of this smaller tumor hotspot determines the required accuracy of the registration. We investigate the percentage of tumors that are heterogeneous and the corresponding hotspot volume. Results show a hotspot in 63% of the tumors, with a median volume of 0.3 cm3. By assuming a spherical shape, the required accuracy can be determined. For a 90% tumor hit-rate, the registration error should be less than 2.87 mm.

Keywords

MR-US registration accuracy hotspot prostate biopsy 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    de Souza, N.M., Riches, S.F., Vanas, N.J., Morgan, V.A., Ashley, S.A., Fisher, C., Payne, G.S., Parker, C.: Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging: a potential non-invasive marker of tumour aggressiveness in localized prostate cancer. Clin. Radiol. 63(7), 774–782 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hambrock, H., Hoeks, C., Scheenen, T., Fütterer, J.J., Bouwense, S., van Oort, I., Schröder, F., Huisman, H.J., Barentsz, J.O.: Prospective assessment of prostate cancer aggressiveness using 3 Tesla diffusion weighted MR imaging guided biopsies versus a systematic 10-core transrectal ultrasound prostate biopsy cohort. Eur. Urol (submitted 2011)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hambrock, T., Somford, D.M., Hoeks, C., Bouwense, S.A.W., Huisman, H., Yakar, D., van Oort, I.M., Witjes, J.A., Fütterer, J.J., Barentsz, J.O.: Magnetic resonance imaging guided prostate biopsy in men with repeat negative biopsies and increased prostate specific antigen. J. Urol. 183(2), 520–527 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hambrock, T., Somford, D.M., Huisman, H.J., van Oort, I.M., Witjes, J.A., van de Kaa, C.A.H., Scheenen, T., Barentsz, J.O.: Relationship between apparent diffusion coefficients at 3.0-T MR imaging and Gleason grade in peripheral zone prostate cancer. Radiology 259(2), 453–461 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hu, Y., Ahmed, H.U., Taylor, Z., Allen, C., Emberton, M., Hawkes, D., Barratt, D.: MR to ultrasound registration for image-guided prostate interventions. Med. Image Ana. (in Press 2011) (accepted Manuscript)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Itou, Y., Nakanishi, K., Narumi, Y., Nishizawa, Y., Tsukuma, H.: Clinical utility of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values in patients with prostate cancer: can ADC values contribute to assess the aggressiveness of prostate cancer? J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 33(1), 167–172 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Jemal, A., Bray, F., Center, M.M., Ferlay, J., Ward, E., Forman, D.: Global cancer statistics. CA Cancer J. Clin. 61(2), 69–90 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kadoury, S., Yan, P., Xu, S., Glossop, N., Choyke, P., Turkbey, B., Pinto, P., Wood, B.J., Kruecker, J.: Realtime TRUS/MRI fusion targeted-biopsy for prostate cancer: A clinical demonstration of increased positive biopsy rates. In: Madabhushi, A., Dowling, J., Yan, P., Fenster, A., Abolmaesumi, P., Hata, N. (eds.) MICCAI 2010. LNCS, vol. 6367, pp. 52–62. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Karnik, V.V., Fenster, A., Bax, J., Cool, D.W., Gardi, L., Gyacskov, I., Romagnoli, C., Ward, A.D.: Assessment of image registration accuracy in three-dimensional transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy. Med. Phys. 37(2), 802–813 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kim, J.H., Kim, J.K., Park, B.W., Kim, N., Cho, K.S.: Apparent diffusion coefficient: prostate cancer versus noncancerous tissue according to anatomical region. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 28(5), 1173–1179 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kitajima, K., Kaji, Y., Fukabori, Y.: Prostate cancer detection with 3 T MRI: comparison of diffusion-weighted imaging and dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI in combination with T2-weighted imaging. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 31(3), 625–631 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kvåle, R.: Concordance between Gleason scores of needle biopsies and radical prostatectomy specimens: a population-based study. BJU Int. 103(12), 1647–1654 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Martin, S., Baumann, M., Daanen, V., Troccaz, J.: MR prior based automatic segmentation of the prostate in TRUS images for MR/TRUS data fusion. In: Proceedings of the 2010 IEEE international conference on Biomedical imaging: From Nano to Macro, ISBI 2010, pp. 640–643. IEEE Press, Piscataway (2010)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Miyagawa, T., Ishikawa, S., Kimura, T., Suetomi, T., Tsutsumi, M., Irie, T., Kondoh, M., Mitake, T.: Real-time virtual sonography for navigation during targeted prostate biopsy using magnetic resonance imaging data. Int. J. Urol. 17(10), 855–860 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Roehl, K.A., Antenor, J.A.V., Catalona, W.J.: Serial biopsy results in prostate cancer screening study. J. Urol. 167(6), 2435–2439 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Singh, A.K., Kruecker, J., Xu, S., Glossop, N., Guion, P., Ullman, K., Choyke, P.L., Wood, B.J.: Initial clinical experience with real-time transrectal ultrasonography-magnetic resonance imaging fusion-guided prostate biopsy. BJU Int. 101(7), 841–845 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Tamada, T., Sone, T., Jo, Y., Toshimitsu, S., Yamashita, T., Yamamoto, A., Tanimoto, D., Ito, K.: Apparent diffusion coefficient values in peripheral and transition zones of the prostate: comparison between normal and malignant prostatic tissues and correlation with histologic grade. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 28(3), 720–726 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Tanimoto, A., Nakashima, J., Kohno, H., Shinmoto, H., Kuribayashi, S.: 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(1), 146–152 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Wendy J. M. van de Ven
    • 1
  • Geert J. S. Litjens
    • 1
  • Jelle O. Barentsz
    • 1
  • Thomas Hambrock
    • 1
  • Henkjan J. Huisman
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of RadiologyRadboud University Nijmegen Medical CentreNijmegenThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations