Maximilian J Rabil, Lindsey T Webb, Gabriela M Diaz, Soum D Lokeshwar, Ankur U Choksi, Preston C Sprenkle
{"title":"体积差异:Artemis分段磁共振成像、超声和ExactVu测量对前列腺特异性抗原密度和国家综合癌症网络风险分层的影响。","authors":"Maximilian J Rabil, Lindsey T Webb, Gabriela M Diaz, Soum D Lokeshwar, Ankur U Choksi, Preston C Sprenkle","doi":"10.5173/ceju.2024.0249","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The combination of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and ultrasound (US) allows for better lesion targeting and diagnostic probability compared to random prostate biopsies. The Artemis Fusion Biopsy system and ExactVu micro-US technology capitalize on this advantage and provide higher-resolution imaging of the prostate during biopsy. Their accuracy in measuring prostate volume and resulting implications on prostate specific antigen (PSA) density and risk stratification, however, has not been evaluated. We hypothesized that PSA densities as measured by these modalities will demonstrate clinically insignificant differences compared to standard measurement.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>We retrospectively reviewed all prostate fusion biopsy cases performed at our health system with Artemis or ExactVu systems from April 2021 to July 2023 and compared the PSA density calculated from the volume obtained with these systems to standard measurement with ellipsoid calculation from MRI. Change in National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) prostate cancer risk stratification was analyzed for each system.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Artemis MRI segmentation (0.179 ng/ml, p = 0.04) and US (0.181 ng/ml, p = 0.067) underestimated and ExactVu micro-US (0.247 ng/ml, p <0.001) overestimated PSA density. Risk stratification changed in 1.2% of Artemis MRI segmentation cases, 1.6% of Artemis US cases, and 1.2% of ExactVu micro-US cases.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Despite differences in PSA density, choice of fusion biopsy system has minimal clinical impact on risk stratification and any of these studied systems may be used without fear of misrepresenting a patient's disease state.</p>","PeriodicalId":9744,"journal":{"name":"Central European Journal of Urology","volume":"78 1","pages":"1-4"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12073516/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Discrepancies in volume: impact of Artemis segmented magnetic resonance imaging, ultrasound, and ExactVu measurements on prostate specific antigen density and National Comprehensive Cancer Network risk stratification.\",\"authors\":\"Maximilian J Rabil, Lindsey T Webb, Gabriela M Diaz, Soum D Lokeshwar, Ankur U Choksi, Preston C Sprenkle\",\"doi\":\"10.5173/ceju.2024.0249\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The combination of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and ultrasound (US) allows for better lesion targeting and diagnostic probability compared to random prostate biopsies. The Artemis Fusion Biopsy system and ExactVu micro-US technology capitalize on this advantage and provide higher-resolution imaging of the prostate during biopsy. Their accuracy in measuring prostate volume and resulting implications on prostate specific antigen (PSA) density and risk stratification, however, has not been evaluated. We hypothesized that PSA densities as measured by these modalities will demonstrate clinically insignificant differences compared to standard measurement.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>We retrospectively reviewed all prostate fusion biopsy cases performed at our health system with Artemis or ExactVu systems from April 2021 to July 2023 and compared the PSA density calculated from the volume obtained with these systems to standard measurement with ellipsoid calculation from MRI. Change in National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) prostate cancer risk stratification was analyzed for each system.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Artemis MRI segmentation (0.179 ng/ml, p = 0.04) and US (0.181 ng/ml, p = 0.067) underestimated and ExactVu micro-US (0.247 ng/ml, p <0.001) overestimated PSA density. Risk stratification changed in 1.2% of Artemis MRI segmentation cases, 1.6% of Artemis US cases, and 1.2% of ExactVu micro-US cases.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Despite differences in PSA density, choice of fusion biopsy system has minimal clinical impact on risk stratification and any of these studied systems may be used without fear of misrepresenting a patient's disease state.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9744,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Central European Journal of Urology\",\"volume\":\"78 1\",\"pages\":\"1-4\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12073516/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Central European Journal of Urology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5173/ceju.2024.0249\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/3/18 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Central European Journal of Urology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5173/ceju.2024.0249","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/3/18 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
简介:与随机前列腺活检相比,磁共振成像(MRI)和超声(US)的结合可以更好地定位病变和诊断概率。Artemis Fusion活检系统和ExactVu micro-US技术利用了这一优势,在活检过程中提供了更高分辨率的前列腺成像。然而,它们测量前列腺体积的准确性及其对前列腺特异性抗原(PSA)密度和风险分层的影响尚未得到评估。我们假设通过这些方式测量的PSA密度与标准测量相比在临床上没有显著差异。材料和方法:我们回顾性回顾了2021年4月至2023年7月在我们的卫生系统中使用Artemis或ExactVu系统进行的所有前列腺融合活检病例,并将这些系统获得的体积计算的PSA密度与MRI计算的椭球计算的标准测量值进行了比较。分析了国家综合癌症网络(NCCN)前列腺癌风险分层的变化。结果:Artemis MRI分割(0.179 ng/ml, p = 0.04)和US (0.181 ng/ml, p = 0.067)被低估,ExactVu micro-US (0.247 ng/ml, p)被低估。结论:尽管PSA密度存在差异,选择融合活检系统对风险分层的临床影响很小,任何这些研究系统都可以使用,而不必担心误诊患者的疾病状态。
Discrepancies in volume: impact of Artemis segmented magnetic resonance imaging, ultrasound, and ExactVu measurements on prostate specific antigen density and National Comprehensive Cancer Network risk stratification.
Introduction: The combination of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and ultrasound (US) allows for better lesion targeting and diagnostic probability compared to random prostate biopsies. The Artemis Fusion Biopsy system and ExactVu micro-US technology capitalize on this advantage and provide higher-resolution imaging of the prostate during biopsy. Their accuracy in measuring prostate volume and resulting implications on prostate specific antigen (PSA) density and risk stratification, however, has not been evaluated. We hypothesized that PSA densities as measured by these modalities will demonstrate clinically insignificant differences compared to standard measurement.
Material and methods: We retrospectively reviewed all prostate fusion biopsy cases performed at our health system with Artemis or ExactVu systems from April 2021 to July 2023 and compared the PSA density calculated from the volume obtained with these systems to standard measurement with ellipsoid calculation from MRI. Change in National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) prostate cancer risk stratification was analyzed for each system.
Results: Artemis MRI segmentation (0.179 ng/ml, p = 0.04) and US (0.181 ng/ml, p = 0.067) underestimated and ExactVu micro-US (0.247 ng/ml, p <0.001) overestimated PSA density. Risk stratification changed in 1.2% of Artemis MRI segmentation cases, 1.6% of Artemis US cases, and 1.2% of ExactVu micro-US cases.
Conclusions: Despite differences in PSA density, choice of fusion biopsy system has minimal clinical impact on risk stratification and any of these studied systems may be used without fear of misrepresenting a patient's disease state.