Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 23, 2026
Use of MRI-ultrasound Fusion to Achieve Targeted Prostate Biopsy
Published on: April 9, 2019
Comparative Effectiveness of Targeted Prostate Biopsy Using Magnetic Resonance Imaging Ultrasound Fusion Software and
Daniel J Lee1, Pedro Recabal2, Daniel D Sjoberg3
1Department of Urology, Weill-Cornell Medical College, New York Presbyterian Hospital, New York, New York.
Purpose:
We compared the diagnostic outcomes of magnetic resonance-ultrasound fusion and visually targeted biopsy for targeting regions of interest on prostate multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging.
Materials And Methods:
Patients presenting for prostate biopsy with regions of interest on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging underwent magnetic resonance imaging targeted biopsy. For each region of interest 2 visually targeted cores were obtained, followed by 2 cores using a magnetic resonance-ultrasound fusion device. Our primary end point was the difference in the detection of high grade (Gleason 7 or greater) and any grade cancer between visually targeted and magnetic resonance-ultrasound fusion, investigated using McNemar's method. Secondary end points were the difference in detection rate by biopsy location using a logistic regression model and the difference in median cancer length using the Wilcoxon signed rank test.
Results:
We identified 396 regions of interest in 286 men. The difference in the detection of high grade cancer between magnetic resonance-ultrasound fusion biopsy and visually targeted biopsy was -1.4% (95% CI -6.4 to 3.6, p=0.6) and for any grade cancer the difference was 3.5% (95% CI -1.9 to 8.9, p=0.2). Median cancer length detected by magnetic resonance-ultrasound fusion and visually targeted biopsy was 5.5 vs 5.8 mm, respectively (p=0.8). Magnetic resonance-ultrasound fusion biopsy detected 15% more cancers in the transition zone (p=0.046) and visually targeted biopsy detected 11% more high grade cancer at the prostate base (p=0.005). Only 52% of all high grade cancers were detected by both techniques.
Conclusions:
We found no evidence of a significant difference in the detection of high grade or any grade cancer between visually targeted and magnetic resonance-ultrasound fusion biopsy. However, the performance of each technique varied in specific biopsy locations and the outcomes of both techniques were complementary. Combining visually targeted biopsy and magnetic resonance-ultrasound fusion biopsy may optimize the detection of prostate cancer.
