Related Experiment Video
Updated: Feb 15, 2026

Use of MRI-ultrasound Fusion to Achieve Targeted Prostate Biopsy
Published on: April 9, 2019
Precision Matters in MR Imaging-targeted Prostate Biopsies: Evidence from a Prospective Study of Cognitive and
François Cornud1, Mathieu Roumiguié1, Nicolas Barry de Longchamps1
1From the Departments of Radiology (F.C.) and Urology (N.B.d.L.), Hôpital Cochin, Université Paris Descartes, Paris, France; Departments of Urology (M.R., G.P., B.M.) and Radiology (D.P.), Institut Universitaire du Cancer, Toulouse, 1 avenue Irène Joliot-Curie, 31059 Toulouse Cedex 9, France; and Department of Radiology, Clinique Pasteur, Toulouse, France (E.B.).
Abstract:
Purpose To measure the precision in placement of a biopsy needle in a magnetic resonance (MR) imaging-detected target with transrectal ultrasonography (US), to document the clinical relevance of precision, and to report on the precision of cognitive and software-based registrations. Materials and Methods This prospective study was approved by the institutional review board and performed between June 2013 and September 2013. Patients provided informed verbal consent. Two cores each were obtained with cognitive and fusion techniques in 88 patients with a Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System version 1 score of at least 3. Precision was measured with Euclidian geometry by using the Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine archives of the biopsy as the distance from the core to the center (dCC) and the distance from the core to the surface of the target modeled as a sphere. To address clustering of data from multiple cores in the same patients, analyses of precision focused on the best shot for a patient or a technique. The Welch unequal variance t test and Yates corrected χ2 test were used as appropriate. Results Mean precision was 2.5 mm (95% confidence interval: 1.8 mm, 3.3 mm). Positive cores were closer to the center than were negative cores (dCC: 1.7 mm vs 3.1 mm, respectively; P = .025). More cancers were detected with on-target than off-target cores (33 of 71 cores [46.5%] vs three of 17 cores [17.6%]; P = .03). Cores obtained with the fusion technique achieved a higher precision than did cores obtained with the cognitive technique (dCC: 2.8 mm vs 7.1 mm, respectively; P < .0001). Targeted cores demonstrated cancer in 44 patients. Fewer cancers were detected with the cognitive technique than with the fusion technique (31 of 44 patients [70.5%] vs 40 of 44 patients [90.9%]; P = .03). Conclusion A deformable MR imaging/transrectal US image registration system achieved a higher precision and depicted cancer in more patients than did the cognitive freehand technique. © RSNA, 2018.
More Related Videos
06:08A Cognitive Fusion-guided Prostate Biopsy Using Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Transrectal Ultrasound
Published on: March 21, 2025
05:49Use of Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Biopsy Data to Guide Sampling Procedures for Prostate Cancer Biobanking
Published on: October 10, 2019
Related Concept Videos
The Evidence for Evolution
Elastic Collisions: Case Study
Physical and Chemical Properties of Matter
Classifying Matter by State
Nuclear Fusion
A helium nucleus has a mass that is 0.7% less than that of four hydrogen nuclei; this lost mass is converted into energy during the fusion. This reaction produces about...
Classifying Matter by Composition
According to its composition, the matter can be classified into two broad categories — pure substances and mixtures.
A pure substance is a form of matter that has a constant composition throughout with uniform properties. For example, any sample of sucrose has the same composition and same physical properties, such as melting point, color, and sweetness, regardless of the source from which it is isolated.
A mixture is composed of two or...