Literature DB >> 15329107

Does body-coil magnetic-resonance imaging have a role in the preoperative staging of patients with clinically localized prostate cancer?

Darrell J Allen1, Richard Hindley, Sharon Clovis, Patrick O'Donnell, Declan Cahill, Giles Rottenberg, Rick Popert.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the accuracy and use of body-coil magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in the local staging of prostate cancer before radical prostatectomy (RP). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Fifty-six patients undergoing RP were staged before surgery using body-coil MRI; none was denied surgery on the basis of their scan results. All scans were reported before RP by one of three consultant radiologists and afterward by a colleague with a special interest in prostate MRI, unaware of the patients' clinical details.
RESULTS: The overall sensitivity of MRI at detecting extracapsular extension was 50% on general reporting and 72% when reported by the specialist radiologist; the respective specificities were 84% and 86%. Of the 55 patients included in the study, 18 (33%) had extracapsular disease on histological analysis. MRI was most accurate in the 17 patients at high-risk (prostate-specific antigen, PSA, >10 ng/mL and Gleason score >or= 8) and eight at intermediate risk (PSA < 10 ng/mL and Gleason score 7). In the former group with specialist analysis, the sensitivity was 100%, although this decreased to 67% with general reporting. Both gave a specificity of 82%. Intermediate risk disease gave a sensitivity and specificity of 75%, irrespective of reporting method. The ability of MRI to detect extraprostatic tumour in the 30 low-risk patients (PSA < 10 ng/mL and Gleason score 2-6) was poor; the sensitivity was 25% with general and 50% on specialist review, although both methods gave a specificity of >90%.
CONCLUSION: Body-coil MRI is sensitive and specific for identifying extracapsular extension of prostate cancer in patients with high- or intermediate-risk disease. Patients at low risk frequently have microscopic extension which is not detected. Opinion from a radiologist with a special interest in prostate MRI can increase the reporting accuracy even when unaware of the patients' clinical details.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15329107     DOI: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2004.05023.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BJU Int        ISSN: 1464-4096            Impact factor:   5.588


  3 in total

1.  Incremental value of high b value diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging at 3-T for prediction of extracapsular extension in patients with prostate cancer: preliminary experience.

Authors:  Ayumu Kido; Tsutomu Tamada; Teruki Sone; Naoki Kanomata; Yoshiyuki Miyaji; Akira Yamamoto; Katsuyoshi Ito
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2016-12-09       Impact factor: 3.469

2.  Diagnostic accuracy of surface coil magnetic resonance imaging at 1.5 T for local staging of elevated risk prostate cancer.

Authors:  Brian Kim; Rodney H Breau; Demetri Papadatos; Dean Fergusson; Steve Doucette; Ilias Cagiannos; Chris Morash
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2010-08       Impact factor: 1.862

3.  Negative mpMRI Rules Out Extra-Prostatic Extension in Prostate Cancer before Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy.

Authors:  Eoin Dinneen; Clare Allen; Tom Strange; Daniel Heffernan-Ho; Jelena Banjeglav; Jamie Lindsay; John-Patrick Mulligan; Tim Briggs; Senthil Nathan; Ashwin Sridhar; Jack Grierson; Aiman Haider; Christos Panayi; Dominic Patel; Alex Freeman; Jonathan Aning; Raj Persad; Imran Ahmad; Lorenzo Dutto; Neil Oakley; Alessandro Ambrosi; Tom Parry; Veeru Kasivisvanathan; Francesco Giganti; Greg Shaw; Shonit Punwani
Journal:  Diagnostics (Basel)       Date:  2022-04-23
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.