Volume 13, Issue 1
Original Article / Published: September 2025
DOI: https://www.doi.org/10.57045/jemis/1310925.pp61-65
V. Todorova, O. Gatsev, K. Hristov, K. Petkova, I. Saltirov
Clinic of Urology, Department of Urology and Nephrology, Military Medical Academy, Sofia, Bulgaria
Abstract
Introduction: Prostate cancer necessitates precise diagnostic methods to ensure timely and appropriate treatment. The advancement of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), combined in real-time with ultrasound (US) via fusion technology, has enabled enhanced targeted biopsy capabilities. Tumors located within the anterior fibromuscular stroma have traditionally posed significant challenges for histological verification due to limited accessibility by transrectal biopsy. The adoption of a transperineal approach significantly improves diagnostic efficacy in this anatomically challenging region.
Objective: The present study aims to evaluate the diagnostic performance of MRI/US fusion biopsy via transperineal access in detecting clinically significant prostate cancer localized in the anterior zone.
Materials and Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed on patient data collected from January 2023 to June 2025. All patients with elevated total prostate-specific antigen (tPSA) levels underwent MRI assessment with lesions scored according to PI-RADS criteria. Patients presenting with lesions localized to the anterior zone and rated PI-RADS 3 or higher underwent MRI/US fusion-guided transperineal biopsy. Histopathological outcomes were subsequently analyzed.
Results: The cohort consisted of 508 patients, of whom 19.7% (100 patients) demonstrated MRI-detected lesions localized in the anterior zone. The mean age within this subgroup was 66.9 ± 9.2 years. Mean tPSA was 13.6 ± 9.1 ng/ml, with an average prostate volume of 46.2 ± 15.8 cc. Lesion distribution by PI-RADS score was as follows: 35% PI-RADS 3, 50% PI-RADS 4, and 15% PI-RADS 5. Histopathological examination revealed benign prostatic hyperplasia in 27 % or 27 of cases, High Grade PIN in 6 patients; low-grade prostate cancer in 43% (43 patients), and high-grade prostate cancer in 24% (24 patients). Gleason scores were assigned to all positive biopsies, with 15.9% classified as Gleason 3+3=6, 43.4% as Gleason 7 (30.1% Gleason 3+4 and 13.3% Gleason 4+3), 6.2% as Gleason 8, and 4.4% as Gleason 9.
Conclusion: MRI/US fusion biopsy performed via a transperineal approach represents an effective and reliable technique for diagnosing clinically significant prostate cancer located in the anterior zone of the prostate. This method enhances the accuracy of histological confirmation in lesions that are difficult to access through traditional transrectal biopsy and facilitates precise evaluation of tumor aggressiveness.
References
1. Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, et al. Global Cancer Statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN Estimates of Incidence and Mortality Worldwide for 36 Cancers in 185 Countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2021;71(3):209–249.
2. Mottet N, Cornford P, van den Bergh RCN, et al. EAU-EANM-ESTRO-ESUR-ISUP-SIOG Guidelines on Prostate Cancer. Eur Urol. 2024;85(1):1–15.
3. Ahmed HU, El-Shater Bosaily A, Brown LC, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of multi-parametric MRI and TRUS biopsy in prostate cancer (PROMIS): a paired validating confirmatory study. Lancet. 2017;389(10071):815–822.
4. Kasivisvanathan V, Rannikko AS, Borghi M, et al. MRI-Targeted or Standard Biopsy for Prostate-Cancer Diagnosis. N Engl J Med. 2018;378(19):1767–1777.
5. Grummet J, Gorin MA, Popert R, et al. Transperineal vs trans- rectal biopsy in MRI-targeted and systematic prostate biopsy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2020;23(1):38–47.
6. Ahmed HU, El-Shater Bosaily A, Brown LC, et al, and the PROMIS study group. Diagnostic accuracy of multi-parametric MRI and TRUS biopsy in prostate cancer (PROMIS): a paired validating confirmatory study. Lancet 2017;389(10071):815-22.
7. Eldred-Evans, D., et al. Population-Based Prostate Cancer Screening With Magnetic Resonance Imaging or Ultrasonography: The IP1-PROSTAGRAM Study. JAMA Oncol, 2021. 7: 395.
8. Farrell, C., et al. Prostate Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging Program Implementation and Impact: Initial Clinical Experience in a Community Based Health System. Urol Pract, 2018. 5: 165.
9. Reesink, D.J., et al. Comparison of risk-calculator and MRI and consecutive pathways as upfront stratification for prostate biopsy. World J Urol, 2021. 39: 2453.
10.Brown LC, Ahmed HU, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of multi-parametric MRI and PSA for prostate cancer in a population-based screening study (IP1-PROSTAGRAM): a prospective, population-based, paired cohort trial. Lancet Oncol. 2021;22(8):1232–1242.
11. Holm HH, Gammelgaard J. Ultrasonically guided precise needle placement in the prostate and the seminal vesicles. Journal of Urology 1981;126:385.
12. Demura T, Hioka T, Furuno T, et al. Differences in tumor core distribution between palpable and nonpalpable prostate tumors in patients diagnosed using extensive transperineal ultrasound-guided template prostate biopsy. Cancer 2005;103(9):1826-32.
13. Tu, X., et al. Transperineal Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Targeted Biopsy May Perform Better Than Transrectal Route in the Detection of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Clin Genitourin Cancer, 2019. 17: e860.
14. Siddiqui MM, Rais-Bahrami S, Turkbey B, et al. Comparison of MR/ultrasound fusion–guided biopsy with ultrasound-guided biopsy for the diagnosis of prostate cancer. JAMA. 2015;313(4):390–397.
15. Rouvière O, Puech P, Renard-Penna R, et al. Use of prostate systematic and targeted biopsy on the basis of multiparametric MRI in biopsy-naive patients (MRI-FIRST): a prospec- tive, multicentre, paired diagnostic study. Lancet Oncol.2019;20(1):100–109.
16. Van der Leest M, Cornel E, Israel B, et al. Head-to-head comparison of transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy versus multiparametric prostate magnetic resonance imaging with subsequent magnetic resonance-guided biopsy in biopsy-naïve men with elevated prostate-specific antigen: a large prospective multicenter clinical study. Eur Urol. 2019;75(4):570–578.
Keywords:
magnetic resonance imaging, ultrasound, fusion biopsy, clinically, significant prostate cancer, anterior zone.
How to cite this article:
V. Todorova, O. Gatsev, K. Hristov, K. Petkova, I. Saltirov . Efficacy of MRI/US guided fusion biopsy with transperineal approach for histological verification of clinically significant prostate cancer localized in the anterior fibromuscular stroma of the prostate. Journal of Endourology and Minimally Invasive Surgery (Bulgaria), 2025; 13(1): 61-65
Corresponding author:
Dr. Viktoria Todorova
Clinic of Urology
Department of Urology and Nephrology
Military Medical Academy
Sofia 1606
Georgi Sofiyski Blvd. 3
Email: v.todorova0803@gmail.com