Literature DB >> 10725864

Magnetic resonance imaging of prostatic cancer: does detection vary between high and low gleason score tumors?

S Ikonen1, P Kärkkäinen, L Kivisaari, J O Salo, K Taari, T Vehmas, P Tervahartiala, S Rannikko.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Both Gleason score and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) concentration are prognostic factors for prostate cancer. We assessed our ability to localize cancer lesions based on Gleason scores and PSA values by endorectal coil magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). We also evaluated whether the size of the prostate affects tumor detectability.
METHODS: We compared the findings of MRI and histopathological results of radical prostatectomy specimens from 63 patients; they were divided into four groups, based on Gleason score and also on serum PSA concentration. Furthermore, the possible effect of prostatectomy specimen weight on MRI interpretation was examined.
RESULTS: A highly significant difference appeared in detection of cancer lesions based on their differentiation grade. No statistically significant difference existed between PSA groups in detection of tumors, but the large size of the prostate seemed to render image interpretation more difficult.
CONCLUSIONS: Endorectal MRI detects poorly differentiated prostate cancer lesions more accurately than clinically insignificant tumors. Copyright 2000 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10725864     DOI: 10.1002/(sici)1097-0045(20000401)43:1<43::aid-pros6>3.0.co;2-s

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Prostate        ISSN: 0270-4137            Impact factor:   4.104


  6 in total

Review 1.  Is it time to consider a role for MRI before prostate biopsy?

Authors:  Hashim U Ahmed; Alex Kirkham; Manit Arya; Rowland Illing; Alex Freeman; Clare Allen; Mark Emberton
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2009-04       Impact factor: 66.675

2.  Rapid perceptual processing in two- and three-dimensional prostate images.

Authors:  Melissa Treviño; Baris Turkbey; Bradford J Wood; Peter A Pinto; Marcin Czarniecki; Peter L Choyke; Todd S Horowitz
Journal:  J Med Imaging (Bellingham)       Date:  2020-01-03

3.  Effect of Prostate Biopsy Hemorrhage on MRDW and MRS Imaging.

Authors:  Jong Yeon Lee; In Ho Chang; Young Tae Moon; Kyung Do Kim; Soon Chul Myung; Tae Hyoung Kim; Jong Beum Lee
Journal:  Korean J Urol       Date:  2011-10-19

4.  The predictability of T3 disease in staging MRI following prostate biopsy decreases in patients with high initial PSA and Gleason score.

Authors:  Young Hwii Ko; Deuk Jae Sung; Sung Gu Kang; Seok Ho Kang; Jeong Gu Lee; Je Jong Kim; Jun Cheon
Journal:  Asian J Androl       Date:  2011-03-07       Impact factor: 3.285

5.  The role of endorectal magnetic resonance imaging in predicting extraprostatic extension and seminal vesicle invasion in clinically localized prostate cancer.

Authors:  Seo Yong Park; Jung Jun Kim; Tae Heon Kim; Soo Hyun Lim; Deok Hyun Han; Byung Kwan Park; Chan Kyo Kim; Ghee Young Kwon; Han Yong Choi; Hyun Moo Lee
Journal:  Korean J Urol       Date:  2010-05-19

Review 6.  How to improve prostate biopsy detection of prostate cancer.

Authors:  D K Ornstein; J Kang
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2001-06       Impact factor: 3.092

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.