To describe the technique and evaluate the performance of MRI-guided transgluteal in-bore-targeted biopsy of the prostate gland under local anesthesia in patients without rectal access.
Ten men (mean age, 69 (range 57-86) years) without rectal access underwent 13 MRI-guided transgluteal in-bore-targeted biopsy of the prostate gland under local anesthesia. All patients underwent mp-MRI at our institute prior to biopsy. Three patients had prior US-guided transperineal biopsy which was unsuccessful in one, negative in one, and yielded GG1 (GS6) PCa in one. Procedure time, complications, histopathology result, and subsequent management were recorded.
Median interval between rectal surgery and presentation with elevated PSA was 12.5 years (interquartile range (IQR) 25-75, 8-36.5 years). Mean PSA was 11.9 (range, 4.8 -59.0) ng/ml and PSA density was 0.49 (0.05 -3.2) ng/ml/ml. Distribution of PI-RADS v2.0/2.1 scores of the targeted lesions were PI-RADS 5-3; PI-RADS 4-6; and PI-RADS 3-1. Mean lesion size was 1.5 cm (range, 1.0-3.6 cm). Median interval between MRI and biopsy was 5.5 months (IQR 25-75, 1.5-9 months). Mean procedure time was 47.4 min (range, 29-80 min) and the number of cores varied between 3 and 5. Of the 13 biopsies, 4 yielded clinically significant prostate cancer (csPca), with a Gleason score ≥ 7, 1 yielded insignificant prostate cancer (Gleason score = 6), 7 yielded benign prostatic tissue, and one was technically unsuccessful. 3/13 biopsies were repeat biopsies which detected csPCa in 2 out of the 3 patients. None of the patients had biopsy-related complication. Biopsy result changed management to radiation therapy with ADT in 2 patients with the rest on active surveillance.
MRI-guided transgluteal in-bore-targeted biopsy of the prostate gland under local anesthesia is feasible in patients without rectal access.

BACKGROUND: The percutaneous thermal ablation techniques (pTA) are radiofrequency ablation, cryoablation, and microwave ablation, suitable for the treatment of bone oligometastases. Magnetic resonance-guided focused ultrasound (MRgFUS) is a noninvasive ablation technique.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness and safety of MRgFUS and pTA for treating bone oligometastases and their complications.
METHODS: Studies were selected with a PICO/PRISMA protocol: pTA or MRgFUS in patients with bone oligometastases; non-exclusive curative treatment. Exclusion criteria were: primary bone tumor; concurrent radiation therapy; palliative therapy; and absence of imaging at follow-up. PubMed, BioMed Central, and Scopus were searched. The modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale assessed articles quality. For each treatment (pTA and MRgFUS), we conducted two separate random-effects meta-analyses to estimate the pooled effectiveness and safety. The effectiveness was assessed by combining the proportions of treated lesions achieving local tumor control (LTC); the safety by combining the complications rates of treated patients. Meta-regression analyses were performed to identify any outcome predictor.
RESULTS: A total of 24 articles were included. Pooled LTC rate for MRgFUS was 84% (N = 7, 95% CI 66-97%, I2 = 74.7%) compared to 65% of pTA (N = 17, 95% CI 51-78%, I2 = 89.3%). Pooled complications rate was similar, respectively, 13% (95% CI 1-32%, I2 = 81.0%) for MRgFUS and 12% (95% CI 8-18%, I2 = 39.9%) for pTA, but major complications were recorded with pTA only. The meta-regression analyses, including technique type, study design, tumor, and follow-up, found no significant predictors.
CONCLUSIONS: The effectiveness and safety of the two techniques were found comparable, even though MRgFUS is a noninvasive treatment that did not cause any major complication. Limited data availability on MRgFUS and the lack of direct comparisons with pTA may affect these findings.
CONCLUSIONS: MRgFUS can be a valid, safe, and noninvasive treatment for bone oligometastases. Direct comparison studies are needed to confirm its promising benefits.

The aim of this review was to analyze and summarize the most common adverse events (AEs) and complications after magnetic resonance-guided focused ultrasound (MRgFUS) therapy in uterine fibroids (UFs) and to establish the risk factors of their occurrence.
We searched for original research studies evaluating MRgFUS therapy in UFs with outcomes containing AEs and/or complications in different databases (PubMed/MEDLINE, SCOPUS, COCHRANE) until March 2022. Reviews, editorials, opinions or letters, case studies, conference papers and abstracts were excluded from the analysis. The systematic literature search identified 446 articles, 43 of which were analyzed.
According to available evidence, the overall incidence of serious complications in MRgFUS therapy is relatively low. No AEs/complications were reported in 11 out of 43 analyzed studies. The mean occurrence of all AEs in the analyzed material was 24.67%. The most commonly described AEs included pain, skin burns, urinary tract infections and sciatic neuropraxia. Major AEs, such as skin ulcerations or deep vein thrombosis, occurred in 0.41% of cases in the analyzed material.
MRgFUS seems to be safe in UF therapy. The occurrence of AEs, especially major ones, is relatively low in comparison with other methods. The new devices and more experience of their users seem to reduce AE rate. The lack of unification in AE reporting and missing data are the main issues in this area. More prospective, randomized studies with unified reporting and long follow-up are needed to determine the safety in a long-term perspective.

BACKGROUND: Prostate cancer is a common disease in men and has a relatively high mortality rate. However, the interventional medical equipment used for prostate biopsy and brachytherapy has always been a social concern.
METHODS: To understand interventional medical equipment for prostate cancer, the structure of manual, semi-automatic and automatic medical equipment were considered as the mainline, while the corresponding research on these structures were the auxiliary lines. The characteristics and corresponding research status have been discussed.
RESULTS: Interventional medical equipment for prostate cancer with different degrees of automation and its characteristics were determined, and the imaging principles and characteristics of computed tomography, transrectal ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging have been briefly described.
CONCLUSIONS: Certain feasible research suggestions have been proposed for future development from the perspective of structure, accuracy and safety. These include flexible and compact robot structures, high-precision image recognition and guidance, accurate dose planning and monitoring, real-time imaging monitoring without delay, high-precision needle insertion strategy, master-slave control, virtual reality and remote control.

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-targeted biopsies have changed the dogma in prostate cancer diagnosis. Biopsies can be performed either transrectally (MRI-guided and transrectal ultrasound fusion transrectal biopsy [MRI-TRUSB]) or transperineally (MRI-guided and transrectal ultrasound fusion transperineal biopsy [MRI-TPB]).
To evaluate the detection and complication rates of MRI-TRUSB and MRI-TPB.
We performed a literature search in PubMed, Scopus, EMBASE, and CENTRAL, and selected randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies comparing MRI-TRUSB versus MRI-TPB.
Our search identified 3608 studies; we included five in the qualitative and two in the quantitative synthesis. On per-patient pooled analysis for clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa), MRI-TPB detection rates were significantly higher (relative risk 1.28 [95% confidence interval {CI} 1.03-1.60], p =  0.03). On a per-lesion analysis, MRI-TPB anterior csPCa detection rates were statistically significantly higher (relative risk 2.46 [95% CI 1.22-4.98], p =  0.01). On a per-lesion analysis, MRI-TPB and MRI-TRUSB overall cancer detection rates were 75% and 81.6% (p= 0.53), and csPCa detection rates were 65.7% and 75.5% (p =  0.40), respectively. MRI-TPB had lower complication rates (odds ratio 2.56 [95% CI 1.14-5.56, p <  0.05]). On Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) evaluation, we rated all outcomes as \"very low\" certainty of the evidence for all outcome measures.
This review highlights the paucity of good-quality evidence comparing MRI-TPB and MRI-TRUSB. MRI-TPB achieves better detection for csPCa, anterior tumors, and lower infective complications. While RCTs are the highest quality of evidence that can address existing evidence limitations, there are concerns regarding infective complications associated with the MRI-TRUSB. Therefore, the authors propose that researchers and clinicians adopt a pragmatic approach by maintaining prospective databases, internal auditing of the MRI-TPB approach, and comparing these data with historical MRI-TRUSB cohorts.
We looked at the outcomes by comparing magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-guided and transrectal ultrasound fusion transrectal biopsy with MRI-guided and transrectal ultrasound fusion transperineal biopsy (TPB). The analysis suggests, based on very low certainty evidence, that MRI-TPB has better detection for clinically significant prostate cancer, anterior tumors, and lower complications.

Cardiac radioablation (CR), a new treatment for cardiac arrhythmias such as ventricular tachycardia and atrial fibrillation, has had promising clinical outcomes to date. There is consequent desire for rapid clinical adoption. However, CR presents unique challenges to radiation therapy, and it is paramount that clinical adoption be performed safely and effectively. Recent reviews comprehensively detail patient selection, clinical history, treatment outcomes, and treatment toxicities but only briefly mention the technical aspects of CR. To address this knowledge gap, this review collates currently available knowledge regarding CR technology choice and procedural details to help inform and guide clinics considering implementing their own CR program, to aid technique standardization, and to highlight areas that require further development or verification.
Original preclinical and clinical scientific articles that sufficiently detailed CR technical aspects, including pretreatment electrophysiology and imaging, motion analysis and management techniques, treatment planning, and/or treatment delivery, were identified within a comprehensive literature search.
Nineteen preclinical and 18 clinical scientific articles sufficiently detailed the technical aspects of CR treatment deliveries on live subjects. The technical aspects of these scientific articles were diverse: Preclinical treatments have been performed with brachytherapy, photons, protons, and carbon ions, and clinical treatments have been performed with photons using conventional, robotic, and magnetic resonance imaging guided systems. Other technical aspects demonstrated similar variability.
This review summarizes the technical aspects and procedural details of preclinical and clinical CR treatment deliveries and highlights the complexity and current variability of CR. There is need for standardized procedural reporting to aid multicenter and multiplatform evaluation and potential for significant technological improvements in imaging, planning, delivery, and monitoring to maximize the clinical outcomes for selected patients with arrhythmia.

We aimed to compare the accuracy of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) diagnosis by magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy (MRI-TB) versus systematic biopsy (SB) in men suspected of having prostate cancer (PCa).
In biopsy-naïve patients, MRI-TB was more accurate to identify csPCa than SB. However, when comparing specifically MRI-TB versus transperineal (SB), we did not find any difference. Furthermore, in a repeat biopsy scenario, MRI-TB found more csPCa than SB as well. Finally, postanalysis comparing combined biopsy (SB plus MRI-TB) suggests that the later alone may play a role in both scenarios for identifying csPCa.
MRI-TB found more csPCa than SB in patients with suspected PCa in both scenarios, naïve and repeat biopsies, but more studies comparing those methods are warranted before any recommendation on this topic.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the detection rate of clinically significant cancer (CSCa) by magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy (MRI-TB) with that by standard systematic biopsy (SB) and to evaluate the role of MRI-TB as a replacement from SB in men at clinical risk of prostate cancer.
METHODS: The non-systematic literature was searched for peer-reviewed English-language articles using PubMed, including the prospective paired studies, where the index test was MRI-TB and the comparator text was SB. Also the randomized clinical trials (RCTs) are included if one arm was MRI-TB and another arm was SB.
RESULTS: Eighteen prospective studies used both MRI-TB and TRUS-SB, and eight RCT received one of the tests for prostate cancer detection. In most prospective trials to compare MRI-TB vs. SB, there was no significant difference in any cancer detection rate; however, MRI-TB detected more men with CSCa and fewer men with CISCa than SB.
CONCLUSIONS: MRI-TB is superior to SB in detection of CSCa. Since some significant cancer was detected by SB only, a combination of SB with the TB technique would avoid the underdiagnosis of CSCa.

BACKGROUND: Prebiopsy multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) has been increasingly utilized for patients of suspicious prostate cancer (PCa). However, the optimal core number and site for MRI-targeted biopsy have not been clearly elucidated.
METHODS: A systematic search in Pubmed, Embase and Ovid up to June 2019 was conducted and we identified studies reporting detection details of every MRI-targeted core. The incremental diagnostic value of performing additional cores was pooled on per-lesion analysis. Our secondary outcome concentrated on detection accuracy for cores of different site within one lesion.
RESULTS: Five studies comprising 2291 patients were identified to elucidate the association between targeted core number and cancer detection rates. Adding the second core to the first one resulted in 19.8% (range: 13.6-26.7%) increase in the detection rate of clinically significant lesions, and adding the third one to the first two resulted in 11.5% (range: 7.8-14.3%) increase. The incremental value of adding the fourth or the fifth core was 6.0% (4.7%, 6.9%) and 4.1% respectively. Four studies arranging MRI-targeted biopsy of more than two cores in well-determined sequences indicated more positive cores with higher cancer grade through center of the lesions.
CONCLUSIONS: Increasing the number of samples per target from one to two, or two to three resulted in a nonnegligible incremental detection rate of clinically significant lesions, while obtaining more than 3 cores per target provided a diminished incremental value. And performing targeted cores accurately through center of the lesions may help improve diagnostic accuracy.

Prostate cancer is the fourth most common cancer and population-based screening programmes are being increasingly adopted worldwide. Screening-positive patients undergo routine transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided systematic biopsy, which is the current diagnostic standard for prostate cancer. However, systematic biopsies suffer from poor sensitivity, especially for the tumors of the anterior prostate and apex as well as in large volume glands. In the past decade, MRI-guided targeted biopsies have come up, which utilize the multiparametric capability of MRI to target lesions for sampling. MRI/TRUS fusion biopsies combine the advantages of MRI-targeting with that of real-time guidance made possible by TRUS. MRI-TRUS fusion biopsies are being increasingly used in men with high clinical suspicion of prostate cancer who have had prior negative systematic biopsies. A large number of fusion biopsy platforms are currently available commercially. Although the basic workflow is similar, there are differences in the operational software, biopsy routes offered, TRUS acquisition technique, type of correction applied at the time of fusion and in the probe tracking hardware. The article describes the current role and indications of MRI-TRUS fusion biopsy followed by a discussion on the workflow, patient preparation, biopsy procedure and complications.