Literature DB >> 17024497

Prostate cancer: comparison of local staging accuracy of pelvic phased-array coil alone versus integrated endorectal-pelvic phased-array coils. Local staging accuracy of prostate cancer using endorectal coil MR imaging.

Jurgen J Fütterer1, Marc R Engelbrecht, Gerrit J Jager, Robert P Hartman, Bernard F King, Christina A Hulsbergen-Van de Kaa, J Alfred Witjes, Jelle O Barentsz.   

Abstract

To compare the visibility of anatomical details and prostate cancer local staging performance of pelvic phased-array coil and integrated endorectal-pelvic phased-array coil MR imaging, with histologic analysis serving as the reference standard. MR imaging was performed in 81 consecutive patients with biopsy-proved prostate cancer, prior to radical prostatectomy, on a 1.5T scanner. T2-weighted fast spin echo images of the prostate were obtained using phased-array coil and endorectal-pelvic phased-array coils. Prospectively, one radiologist, retrospectively, two radiologists and two less experienced radiologists working in consensus, evaluated and scored all endorectal-pelvic phased-array imaging, with regard to visibility of anatomical details and local staging. Receiver operator characteristics (ROC) analysis was performed. Anatomical details of the overall prostate were significantly better evaluated using the endorectal-pelvic phased-array coil setup (P<0.05). The overall local staging accuracy, sensitivity and specificity for the pelvic phased-array coil was 59% (48/81), 56% (20/36) and 62% (28/45), and for the endorectal-pelvic phased-array coils 83% (67/81), 64% (23/36) and 98% (44/45) respectively, for the prospective reader. Accuracy and specificity were significantly better with endorectal-pelvic phased-array coils (P<0.05). The overall staging accuracy, sensitivity and specificity for the retrospective readers were 78-79% (P<0.05), 56-58% and 96%, for the endorectal-pelvic phased-array coils. Area under the ROC curve (Az) was significantly higher for endorectal-pelvic phased-array coils (Az=0.74) compared to pelvic phased-array coil (Az=0.57), for the prospective reader. The use of endorectal-pelvic phased array coils resulted in significant improvement of anatomic details, extracapsular extension accuracy and specificity. Overstaging is reduced significantly with equal sensitivity when an endorectal-pelvic phased-array coil is used.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 17024497     DOI: 10.1007/s00330-006-0418-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Radiol        ISSN: 0938-7994            Impact factor:   5.315


  41 in total

1.  Extraprostatic spread of clinically localized prostate cancer: factors predictive of pT3 tumor and of positive endorectal MR imaging examination results.

Authors:  François Cornud; Thierry Flam; Laurent Chauveinc; Khaled Hamida; Yves Chrétien; Annick Vieillefond; Olivier Hélénon; Jean François Moreau
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2002-07       Impact factor: 11.105

2.  Dynamic TurboFLASH subtraction technique for contrast-enhanced MR imaging of the prostate: correlation with histopathologic results.

Authors:  G J Jager; E T Ruijter; C A van de Kaa; J J de la Rosette; G O Oosterhof; J R Thornbury; S H Ruijs; J O Barentsz
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1997-06       Impact factor: 11.105

3.  Detection of extracapsular extension of prostate carcinoma with endorectal and phased-array coil MR imaging: multivariate feature analysis.

Authors:  K K Yu; H Hricak; R Alagappan; D M Chernoff; P Bacchetti; C J Zaloudek
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1997-03       Impact factor: 11.105

4.  Staging of prostatic cancer: accuracy of MR imaging.

Authors:  C Langlotz; M Schnall; H Pollack
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1995-03       Impact factor: 11.105

5.  Cancer statistics, 2005.

Authors:  Ahmedin Jemal; Taylor Murray; Elizabeth Ward; Alicia Samuels; Ram C Tiwari; Asma Ghafoor; Eric J Feuer; Michael J Thun
Journal:  CA Cancer J Clin       Date:  2005 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 508.702

6.  Clinical stage B prostate carcinoma: staging with MR imaging.

Authors:  P R Biondetti; J K Lee; D Ling; W J Catalona
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1987-02       Impact factor: 11.105

7.  Invasion of the neurovascular bundle by prostate cancer: evaluation with MR imaging.

Authors:  C M Tempany; A D Rahmouni; J I Epstein; P C Walsh; E A Zerhouni
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1991-10       Impact factor: 11.105

8.  Prostate carcinoma: assessment of diagnostic criteria for capsular penetration on endorectal coil MR images.

Authors:  E K Outwater; R O Petersen; E S Siegelman; L G Gomella; C E Chernesky; D G Mitchell
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1994-11       Impact factor: 11.105

9.  Carcinoma of the prostate gland: MR imaging with pelvic phased-array coils versus integrated endorectal--pelvic phased-array coils.

Authors:  H Hricak; S White; D Vigneron; J Kurhanewicz; A Kosco; D Levin; J Weiss; P Narayan; P R Carroll
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1994-12       Impact factor: 11.105

10.  Prostate cancer: incremental value of endorectal MR imaging findings for prediction of extracapsular extension.

Authors:  Liang Wang; Michael Mullerad; Hui-Ni Chen; Steven C Eberhardt; Michael W Kattan; Peter T Scardino; Hedvig Hricak
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2004-05-27       Impact factor: 11.105

View more
  46 in total

1.  Prediction of prostate cancer extracapsular extension with high spatial resolution dynamic contrast-enhanced 3-T MRI.

Authors:  B Nicolas Bloch; Elizabeth M Genega; Daniel N Costa; Ivan Pedrosa; Martin P Smith; Herbert Y Kressel; Long Ngo; Martin G Sanda; William C Dewolf; Neil M Rofsky
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2012-06-03       Impact factor: 5.315

2.  Accuracy of preoperative endo-rectal coil magnetic resonance imaging in detecting clinical under-staging of localized prostate cancer.

Authors:  Antonio B Porcaro; Alessandro Borsato; Mario Romano; Teodoro Sava; Claudio Ghimenton; Filippo Migliorini; Carmelo Monaco; Emanuele Rubilotta; Stefano Zecchini Antoniolli; Vincenzo Lacola; Stefania Montemezzi
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2012-07-07       Impact factor: 4.226

3.  Multiparametric MRI of the prostate at 3 T: limited value of 3D (1)H-MR spectroscopy as a fourth parameter.

Authors:  Stephan H Polanec; Katja Pinker-Domenig; Peter Brader; Dietmar Georg; Shahrokh Shariat; Claudio Spick; Martin Susani; Thomas H Helbich; Pascal A Baltzer
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2015-09-25       Impact factor: 4.226

4.  In vivo 3T and ex vivo 7T diffusion tensor imaging of prostate cancer: Correlation with histology.

Authors:  Carlos F Uribe; Edward C Jones; Silvia D Chang; S Larry Goldenberg; Stefan A Reinsberg; Piotr Kozlowski
Journal:  Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2015-02-24       Impact factor: 2.546

Review 5.  The normal post-surgical anatomy of the male pelvis following radical prostatectomy as assessed by magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  Steven D Allen; Alan Thompson; S Aslam Sohaib
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2008-02-13       Impact factor: 5.315

6.  Two-dimensional MR spectroscopy of healthy and cancerous prostates in vivo.

Authors:  M Albert Thomas; Thomas Lange; S Sendhil Velan; Rajakumar Nagarajan; Steve Raman; Ana Gomez; Daniel Margolis; Stephany Swart; Raymond R Raylman; Rolf F Schulte; Peter Boesiger
Journal:  MAGMA       Date:  2008-07-17       Impact factor: 2.310

7.  Evaluation of the ESUR PI-RADS scoring system for multiparametric MRI of the prostate with targeted MR/TRUS fusion-guided biopsy at 3.0 Tesla.

Authors:  M C Roethke; T H Kuru; S Schultze; D Tichy; A Kopp-Schneider; M Fenchel; H-P Schlemmer; B A Hadaschik
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2013-10-03       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 8.  Role of magnetic resonance imaging and magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging before and after radiotherapy for prostate cancer.

Authors:  Antonio C Westphalen; David A McKenna; John Kurhanewicz; Fergus V Coakley
Journal:  J Endourol       Date:  2008-04       Impact factor: 2.942

9.  Poor standard mp-MRI and routine biopsy fail to precisely predict intraprostatic tumor localization.

Authors:  Andrea Billing; Alexander Buchner; Christian Stief; Alexander Roosen
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2016-02-24       Impact factor: 4.226

10.  Influence of imaging and histological factors on prostate cancer detection and localisation on multiparametric MRI: a prospective study.

Authors:  Flavie Bratan; Emilie Niaf; Christelle Melodelima; Anne Laure Chesnais; Rémi Souchon; Florence Mège-Lechevallier; Marc Colombel; Olivier Rouvière
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2013-03-15       Impact factor: 5.315

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.