Abstract: Literature review is dedicated to the diagnosis of prostate cancer (PCa), namely the use of Fusion-technology, a technique which allows you to combine real-time data of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and transrectal ultrasound (TRUS), as well as to perform biopsy of the prostate, taking into consideration previously detected changes. Review includes russian-language and foreign articles that discuss not only benefits, but also limit of the use of methods of prostate biopsy in verification of malignant pathology Review is based on data of main online resources: PubMed, Scientific Electronic Library (elibrary), SciVerse (ScienceDirect), Scopus. During analysis of available literature, authors discuss the problem of prostate cancer diagnostics, difficulties encountered when using of traditional biopsy methods. Review pays special attention to MRI/TRUS Fusion-navigation in diagnosis of prostate cancer as an alternative to other, more widely used in practice methods as for initial biopsy and for repeated manipulations Conclusions: A key aspect of the application of MRI/TRUS Fusion-navigation is the ability to perform precisely targeted biopsy of suspicious sites by the presence of malignant changes ir prostate tissue, which increases the accuracy of diagnosis of tumors. Above described method of biopsy is extremely promising as part of specifying diagnostics of localized forms of prostate cancer. Methodics appeared informative in identifying clinically significant prostate cancer and accurate for localization of process, especially in front parts of the prostate, compared with 12 traditional points of biopsy At the same time, this manipulation, compared with traditional biopsy technique, requires advanced equipment and highly skilled personnel. References 1. Kaprin A. D., Starinskij V. V., Petrova G. V. (red.) Sostojanie onkologicheskoj pomoshhi naseleniju Rossii v 2012 godu [The condition of oncological service to the population of 2. Schroder FH, Hugosson J, Roobol MJ, et al.; ERSPC Investigators. Screening and prostate-cancer mortality in a randomized European study. N. Engl. J. Med. 2009 Mar 26; 360(13):1320-8. 3. Hodge K.K., McNeal J.E., Terris M.K., et al. Random systematic versus directed ultrasound guided transrectal core biopsies of the prostate. J. Urol. 1989; 142: 71-75. 4. Stamey T.A. Making the most out of sextant biopsies. Urology. 1995; 45: 2-12. 5. Littrup P.J., Bailey S.E. Prostate cancer: the role of transrectal ultrasound and its impact on cancer detection and management. Radiol.Clin.N.Am. 2000;38(1): 87-113. 6. Aljaev Ju.G., Sinicyn V.E., Grigor'ev N.A. Magnitno-rezonansnaja tomografija v urologii [Magnetic resonance imaging in urology]. Moskva. 2005; 160-189 [In Russ]. 7. Harchenko V.P., Kaprin A.D., Amosov F.R.; Rak predstatel'noj zhelezy: problemy diagnostiki [Prostate cancer problems in detection]. Lechashhij vrach. 1999; 1: 4-8 [In Russ]. 8. Taira A.V., Merrick G.S., Galbreath R.W., et al. Performance of transperineal template-guided mapping biopsy in detecting prostate cancer in the initial and repeat biopsy setting. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2010; 13:71-77. 9. Javed S.I., Chadwick E., Edwards A.A., et al. Does prostate HistoScanning™ play a role in detecting prostate cancer in routine clinical practice? Results from three independent studies. BJU Int. 2013 Nov 13. doi: 10.1111/bju.12568. 10. Futterer J.J., Verma S., Hambrock Т., Yakar D. and Barentsz J.O.; High-risk prostate cancer: value of multimodality 3T MRI-guided biopsies after previous negative biopsies. Abdominal Imaging. 2012 Oct; 37(5):892-6. 11. Bittencourt L.K., Hausmann D., Sabaneeff N., Gas- paretto E.L. and Barentsz J.O.; Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate: current concepts. Radiol Bras. 2014 Sep-Oct; 47(5):292-300. 12. Hambrock Т., Somford D.M., Hoeks C., Bouwense S.A.W., et al. Magnetic resonance imaging guided prostate biopsy in men with repeat negative biopsies and increased prostate specific antigen. Journal of Urology. 2010 Feb; 183(2):520-7. 13. Hambrock T., Hoeks C., Hulsbergen-Van de Kaa et al.; Prospective Assessment of Prostate Cancer Aggressiveness Using 3-T Diffusion-Weighted Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Guided Biopsies Versus a Systematic 10-Core Transrectal Ultrasound Prostate Biopsy Cohort. Eur. Urol. 2012 Jan; 61(1):177-84. 14. Kaplan I., Oldenburg N.E., Meskell P., et al. Real time MRI-ultrasound image guided stereotactic prostate biopsy. Magn. Reson. Imaging. 2002;20:295-299. 15. Singh A.K., Kruecker J., Xu S., et al. Initial clinical experience with real-time transrectal ultrasonography-magnetic resonance imaging fusion-guided prostate biopsy. BJUInt. 2007;101:841-845. 16. Pinto P.A., Chung PH., Rastinehad A.R., et al. Magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound fusion guided prostate biopsy improves cancer detection following transrectal ultrasound biopsy and correlates with multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging. J.Urol. 2011; 186:1281-1285. 17. Miyagawa T., Ishikawa S., Kimura T., et al. Real-time virtual sonography for navigation during targeted prostate biopsy using magnetic resonance imaging data. Int.J. Urol. 2010; 17: P855-860. 18. Ukimura O., Hirahara N., Fujihara A., et al. Technique for a hybrid system of real-time transrectal ultrasound with preoperative magnetic resonance imaging in the guidance of targeted prostate biopsy. Int. J. Urol. 2010; 17: 890-893. 19. Bax J., Cool D., Gardi L., et al. Mechanically assisted 3D ultrasound guided prostate biopsy system. Med. Phys. 2008; 35: 5397-5410. 20. Mozer P, Rouprrt M., Le Cossec C., et al. First round of targeted biopsies with magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound-fusion images compared to conventional ultrasound-guided transrectal biopsies for the diagnosis of localised prostate cancer. J Urol. 2014 Jul;192(1): 127-8. 21. Sonn G.A., Margolis D.J., Marks L.S. Target detection: Magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion-guided prostate biopsy. Urol Oncol. 2014 Aug;32(6):903-11 22. Schoots I.G., Bangma C.H. MRI/US-fusion for targeted prostate biopsy. Ned. Tijdschr Geneeskd. 2014; 158. 23. Rastinehad A.R., Turkbey B., Salami S.S., et al. Improving Detection of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer: Magnetic Resonance Imaging/Transrectal Ultrasound Fusion Guided Prostate Biopsy. J Urol. 2014 Jun;191(6): 1749-54. 24. Volkin D., Turkbey B., Hoang A.N., et al. Multiparametric MRI and Subsequent MR/Ultrasound Fusion-Guided Biopsy Increase the Detection of Anteriorly Located Prostate Cancers. BJU Int. 2014 Dec;114(6b):E43-9. 25. Siddiqui M.M., Rais-Bahrami S., Truong H., et al. Magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound-fusion biopsy significantly upgrades prostate cancer versus systematic 12-core transrectal ultrasound biopsy. Eur Urol. 2013 Nov;64(5):713-9. 26. Walton Diaz A., Hoang A.N., Turkbey B., et al. Can magnetic resonance-ultrasound fusion biopsy improve cancer detection in enlarged prostates? J Urol. 2013 Dec;190(6):2020-5. 27. Sonn G.A., Chang E., Natarajan S., et al. Value of targeted prostate biopsy using magnetic resonance-ultrasound fusion in men with prior negative biopsy and elevated prostate-specific antigen. Eur Urol. 2014 Apr;65(4): 809-15. 28. Lawrence EM1, Tang SY Barrett T et al. Prostate cancer: performance characteristics of combined T2W and DW-MRI scoring in the setting of template transperineal re-biopsy using MR-TRUS fusion. Eur Radiol. 2014 Jul;24(7): 1497-505. 29. Durmus T., Stephan C., Grigoryev M., et al. Detection of prostate cancer by real-time MR/ultrasound fusion-guided biopsy: 3T MRI and state of the art sonography. Rofo. 2013 May;185(5):428-33. 30. Hu J.C., Chang E., Natarajan S., et al. Targeted Prostate Biopsy to Select Men for Active Surveillance: Do the Epstein Criteria Still Apply? J Urol. 2014 Aug;192(2): 385-90 31. Hong C.W., Walton-Diaz A., Rais-Bahrami S., et al. Imaging and pathology findings after an initial negative MRI-US fusion-guided and 12-core extended sextant prostate biopsy session. Diagn Interv Radiol. 2014 May-Jun;20(3):234-8.
