Literature DB >> 11000183

Endorectal color doppler sonography and endorectal MR imaging features of nonpalpable prostate cancer: correlation with radical prostatectomy findings.

F Cornud1, K Hamida, T Flam, O Hélénon, Y Chrétien, N Thiounn, J M Correas, J M Casanova, J F Moreau.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to describe endorectal sonography and color Doppler sonography features of nonpalpable prostate cancer and to assess the value of endorectal MR imaging for the preoperative local staging of these tumors.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ninety-four patients with nonsuspicious findings on digital rectal examination and a mean prostate-specific antigen level of 16.3 +/-10 ng/mL (median, 13 ng/mL) underwent endorectal sonography, color Doppler sonography, sextant endorectal sonographically guided biopsy, and endorectal MR imaging before radical prostatectomy.
RESULTS: Tumors were visible in 48 cases and not visible in 46. The mean Gleason biopsy score, the frequency of tumors involving three sextants or more of the prostate gland at biopsies, and the frequency of stage pT3 tumors were significantly higher in patients with visible tumors (5.9+/-0.9, 42%, and 37.5%) than in those with invisible tumors (5.4+/-1.1, 17%, and 17%). The 42 hypervascular tumors were hypoechoic in every case and had a higher rate of Gleason tumor grades 4 and 5 at biopsy than did the 52 hypovascular tumors (33% versus 11.5%). Six hypovascular tumors (6/52, 11.5%, two visible) had an insignificant tumor volume. Established extraprostatic tumor spread was detected on MR imaging in six of 18 cases (sensitivity, 33%; specificity, 100%0, all of which had the following four features: hypervascularity, prostate-specific antigen level greater than 20 ng/mL, three or more sextants of the gland having positive findings at biopsy, and seminal vesicle invasion.
CONCLUSION: Endorectal sonography and color Doppler sonography are useful to differentiate low-risk invisible and hypovascular tumors from high-risk visible and hypervascular tumors. However, MR imaging has a poor sensitivity for the detection of extraprostatic spread and is accurate only in a minority of highly selected high-risk hypervascular tumors.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2000        PMID: 11000183     DOI: 10.2214/ajr.175.4.1751161

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol        ISSN: 0361-803X            Impact factor:   3.959


  7 in total

1.  Seminal vesicle invasion in prostate cancer: evaluation by using multiparametric endorectal MR imaging.

Authors:  Fatma Nur Soylu; Yahui Peng; Yulei Jiang; Shiyang Wang; Christine Schmid-Tannwald; Ila Sethi; Scott Eggener; Tatjana Antic; Aytekin Oto
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2013-02-25       Impact factor: 11.105

2.  Multi-parametric MR imaging of transition zone prostate cancer: Imaging features, detection and staging.

Authors:  Arda Kayhan; Xiaobing Fan; Jacob Oommen; Aytekin Oto
Journal:  World J Radiol       Date:  2010-05-28

Review 3.  Contrast specific imaging in the detection and localization of prostate cancer.

Authors:  Hessel Wijkstra; Margot H Wink; Jean J M C H de la Rosette
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2004-10-05       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 4.  New horizons in prostate cancer imaging.

Authors:  Gregory Ravizzini; Baris Turkbey; Karen Kurdziel; Peter L Choyke
Journal:  Eur J Radiol       Date:  2008-11-07       Impact factor: 3.528

Review 5.  Imaging techniques for prostate cancer: implications for focal therapy.

Authors:  Baris Turkbey; Peter A Pinto; Peter L Choyke
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2009-04       Impact factor: 14.432

6.  PET Imaging of Angiogenesis.

Authors:  Gang Niu; Xiaoyuan Chen
Journal:  PET Clin       Date:  2009-01-01

7.  Impact of a novel ultrasound microvascular imaging and elastography on prostate cancer classification.

Authors:  Ting-Ting Shen; Jun-Li Xue
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2019-12
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.