Current approaches to targeted prostate biopsy
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.18565/urology.2021.5.112-117
S.V. Popov, I.N. Orlov, S.M. Malevich, I.V. Sushina, E.A. Grin', T.M. Topuzov, P.V. Vjazovcev, D.Yu. Chernysheva, V.A. Neradovskiy
1) SPb GBUZ «City Hospital Saint Luka», Saint Petersburg, Russia;
2) Department of Urology of North-Western State Medical University named after I.I. Mechnikov, Saint Petersburg, Russia;
3) Department of Urology of FGBVOU VO S. M. Kirov Military Medical Academy of the Ministry of Defense of Russian Federation, Saint Petersburg, Russia;
4) Department of Hospital Surgery of Medical Faculty of SPbGU, Saint Petersburg, Russia
Currently, prostate cancer (PCa) is the second most common malignancy in men after lung cancer and the fifth leading cause of death worldwide. According to world and national statistics, over the past 20 years, there has been a steady increase in both incidence and mortality from PCa. Prostate biopsy is the cornerstone of the PCa diagnosis. However, recently, systematic transrectal biopsy as a standard approach has been questioned, since it has significant drawbacks that reduce the quality of PCa diagnosis.
Considering the clinical importance of accurate PCa staging, MRI-guided targeted biopsy has been developed, which is currently the most accurate technique for taking a sample of tissue from suspicious areas. The optimal approaches to targeted prostate biopsy and the potential possibilities of including multiparametric MRI in the primary diagnostic algorithm are highlighted in this review, based on the results of large studies. The method allows to increase the overall PCa detection rate, the detection rates of clinically significant PCa, reduce the frequency of diagnosis of low-risk tumors and increase the overall accuracy of PCa detection, which has an outmost importance for the patient selection for active surveillance and to control disease progression.
Keywords: Fusion-biopsy, prostate cancer, MRI, targeted biopsy, diagnosis of the prostate cancer
About the Autors
Corresponding author: S.M. Malevich – urologist at the Department of Urology. SPb GBUZ «City Hospital Saint Luka», Saint Petersburg, Russia; e-mail: malevichsm@gmail.com