3D Navigo™ versus TRUS-guided prostate biopsy in prostate cancer detection

• Published in: World journal of urology 2016-09, Vol.34 (9), p.1255-1260
• Main Authors: Gayet, Maudy, van der Aa, Anouk, Schmitz, Peter, Beerlage, Harrie P., Schrier, Bart Ph, Mulders, Peter F. A., Mischi, Massimo, Wijkstra, Hessel
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Humans; Image-Guided Biopsy; Imaging, Three-Dimensional; Male; Medicine; Medicine & Public Health; Middle Aged; Nephrology; Oncology; Original Article; Prostate - diagnostic imaging; Prostate - pathology; Prostatic Neoplasms - diagnostic imaging; Prostatic Neoplasms - pathology; Rectum; Retrospective Studies; Ultrasonography, Interventional - methods; Urology
• ISSN: 0724-4983; 1433-8726
• DOI: 10.1007/s00345-016-1775-9

Introduction To overcome the limitations regarding transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided biopsies in prostate cancer (PCa) detection, there is a focus on new imaging technologies. The Navigo™ system (UC-care, Israel) uses regular TRUS images and electrospatial monitoring to generate a 3D model of the prostate. The aim of this study was to compare cancer detection rates between the Navigo™ system and conventional TRUS, in patients without a history of PCa. Methods We performed a retrospective study by collecting data from all patients who underwent 12-core prostate biopsies from lateral peripheral zones between September 2013 and February 2015 at the Jeroen Bosch Hospital in ‘s-Hertogenbosch (Netherlands). Results A total of 325 patients met our inclusion criteria. 77.8 % of biopsy sessions were performed using the Navigo™ system. There was no statistically significant difference in PCa detection (39.9 vs 46.2 % with Navigo™ system and TRUS, respectively). Using the Navigo™ system for taking prostate biopsies proved not to be associated with the presence of PCa at biopsy, likewise for clinically significant PCa and for both subgroups. Limitations The limitations of the study include its retrospective design, the limited number of patients in the conventional TRUS group, the statistically significant different number of biopsy sessions and the ones performed by an advanced physician in both groups. Conclusion In our study, there is no added value of 3D TRUS using Navigo™ system compared to conventional 2D TRUS regarding PCa detection in biopsy-naive men and men with prior negative biopsy.