Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2014 Nov;114(5):641-52.
doi: 10.1111/bju.12593. Epub 2014 May 22.

Current status of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and ultrasonography fusion software platforms for guidance of prostate biopsies

Affiliations
Review

Current status of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and ultrasonography fusion software platforms for guidance of prostate biopsies

Jennifer K Logan et al. BJU Int. 2014 Nov.

Abstract

Prostate MRI is currently the best diagnostic imaging method for detecting PCa. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)/ultrasonography (US) fusion allows the sensitivity and specificity of MRI to be combined with the real-time capabilities of transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS). Multiple approaches and techniques exist for MRI/US fusion and include direct 'in bore' MRI biopsies, cognitive fusion, and MRI/US fusion via software-based image coregistration platforms.

Keywords: MRI/US fusion; MRI/US fusion platforms; prostate MRI; targeted biopsy.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Images from a 65 year old male with serum PSA 8.7 ng/mL and four previously negative TRUS biopsies who underwent a multiparametric MRI(mpMRI).The axial T2W MR image (A) demonstrates an anterior hypointense lesion in the right apical central gland (yellow asterisk); an ADC map of DW-MRI (B) shows a hypointense focus (yellow asterisk) indicating restricted diffusion; quantitative mapping from DCE-MRI (C) localizes the tumor(yellow box); and MRSI (D) (yellow box) demonstrates an increased choline-to-citrine ratio within the lesion. This patient underwent a MRI/US fusion-guided biopsy following mpMRI demonstrating Gleason 4+4 = 8 (90% in 2 targeted cores) in the right anterior lesion.
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Elastic and Rigid Software Image Registration Methods. Pre-biopsy MR data is registered with real-time TRUS images by aligning landmarks(e.g. points, curves, surfaces,) in corresponding images via rigid or elastic transformations. (A) represents MRI/US registration when there is minimal TRUS deformation and use of an endorectal coil (ERC) for MR images, and (B) demonstrates increased manual TRUS deformation that can mimic ERC deformation. As seen above, a simple overlay of TRUS and MRI models (middle images in panels A and B) results in reduced correlation between imaging modalities. A rigid registration method can account for translational and rotational differences between models while an elastic registration method has the additional ability to account for local deformations (e.g. caused by an endorectal coil or TRUS probe). However, elastic warping can move or alter relative anatomic location despite more matched borders. ERC, endorectal coil.
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Elastic and Rigid Software Image Registration Methods. Pre-biopsy MR data is registered with real-time TRUS images by aligning landmarks(e.g. points, curves, surfaces,) in corresponding images via rigid or elastic transformations. (A) represents MRI/US registration when there is minimal TRUS deformation and use of an endorectal coil (ERC) for MR images, and (B) demonstrates increased manual TRUS deformation that can mimic ERC deformation. As seen above, a simple overlay of TRUS and MRI models (middle images in panels A and B) results in reduced correlation between imaging modalities. A rigid registration method can account for translational and rotational differences between models while an elastic registration method has the additional ability to account for local deformations (e.g. caused by an endorectal coil or TRUS probe). However, elastic warping can move or alter relative anatomic location despite more matched borders. ERC, endorectal coil.

References

    1. Jemal A, Bray F, Center MM, Ferlay J, Ward E, Forman D. Global cancer statistics. CA Cancer J Clin. 2011 Mar-Apr;61:69–90. 2011. - PubMed
    1. Krahn MD, Mahoney JE, Eckman MH, Trachtenberg J, Pauker SG, Detsky AS. Screening for prostate cancer. A decision analytic view. JAMA. 1994 Sep;272:773–80. - PubMed
    1. Chodak GW KP, Schoenberg HW. Assessment of screening for prostate cancer using the digital rectal examination. J Urol. 1989;141(5):1136. - PubMed
    1. Newcomer LM, Stanford JL, Blumenstein BA, Brawer MK. Temporal trends in rates of prostate cancer: declining incidence of advanced stage disease, 1974 to 1994. J Urol. 1997 Oct;158:1427–30. - PubMed
    1. Hodge KK, McNeal JE, Stamey TA. Ultrasound guided transrectal core biopsies of the palpably abnormal prostate. J Urol. 1989 Jul;142:66–70. - PubMed

Publication types