Literature DB >> 17717328

Prostate cancer: accurate determination of extracapsular extension with high-spatial-resolution dynamic contrast-enhanced and T2-weighted MR imaging--initial results.

B Nicolas Bloch1, Edna Furman-Haran, Thomas H Helbich, Robert E Lenkinski, Hadassa Degani, Christian Kratzik, Martin Susani, Andrea Haitel, Silvia Jaromi, Long Ngo, Neil M Rofsky.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To prospectively compare the sensitivity and specificity of high-spatial-resolution dynamic contrast material-enhanced magnetic resonance (MR) imaging with those of high-spatial-resolution T2-weighted MR imaging, performed with an endorectal coil (ERC), for assessment of extracapsular extension (ECE) and staging in patients with prostate cancer, with histopathologic findings as reference.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study was approved by the institutional internal review board; a signed informed consent was obtained. MR imaging of the prostate at 1.5 T was performed with combined surface coils and ERCs in 32 patients (mean age, 65 years; range, 42-78 years) before radical prostatectomy. High-spatial-resolution T2-weighted fast spin-echo and high-spatial-resolution dynamic contrast-enhanced three-dimensional gradient-echo images were acquired with gadopentetate dimeglumine. Dynamic contrast-enhanced MR images were analyzed with a computer-generated color-coded scheme. Two experienced readers independently assessed ECE and tumor stage. MR imaging-based staging results were compared with histopathologic results. For the prediction of ECE, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) were calculated. Staging accuracy was determined with the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) by using the Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney index of diagnostic accuracy.
RESULTS: The mean sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV for assessment of ECE with the combined data sets for both readers were 86%, 95%, 90%, and 93%, respectively. The sensitivity of MR images for determination of ECE was significantly improved for both readers (>25%) with combined data sets compared with T2-weighted MR images alone. The combined data sets had a mean overall staging accuracy for both readers of 95%, as determined with AUC. Staging results for both readers were significantly improved (P<.05) with the combined data sets compared with T2-weighted MR images alone.
CONCLUSION: The combination of high-spatial-resolution dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging and T2-weighted MR imaging yields improved assessment of ECE and better results for prostate cancer staging compared with either technique independently. Copyright (c) RSNA, 2007.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17717328     DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2451061502

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiology        ISSN: 0033-8419            Impact factor:   11.105


  60 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.  Ultra-high-b-value diffusion-weighted MR imaging for the detection of prostate cancer: evaluation in 201 cases with histopathological correlation.

Authors:  Kazuhiro Katahira; Taro Takahara; Thomas C Kwee; Seitaro Oda; Yasuko Suzuki; Shoji Morishita; Kosuke Kitani; Yasuyuki Hamada; Mitsuhiko Kitaoka; Yasuyuki Yamashita
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2010-07-18       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 3.  Technological advances in radiation therapy for prostate cancer.

Authors:  Mehee Choi; Arthur Y Hung
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2010-05       Impact factor: 3.092

4.  Pathological findings and oncological control afforded by radical prostatectomy in men with high-risk prostate cancer: a single-centre study.

Authors:  Alexandra Masson-Lecomte; Vincent Hupertan; Eva Comperat; Christophe Vaessen; Emmanuel Chartier-Kastler; Olivier Cussenot; Marc-Olivier Bitker; Morgan Rouprêt
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2010-11-12       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 5.  Dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging and pharmacokinetic models in prostate cancer.

Authors:  Tobias Franiel; Bernd Hamm; Hedvig Hricak
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2010-12-24       Impact factor: 5.315

6.  2D and 3D T2-weighted MR sequences for the assessment of neurovascular bundle changes after nerve-sparing radical retropubic prostatectomy with erectile function correlation.

Authors:  Valeria Panebianco; Alessandro Sciarra; Marcello Osimani; Danilo Lisi; Mauro Ciccariello; Stefano Salciccia; Vincenzo Gentile; Franco Di Silverio; Roberto Passariello
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2008-07-24       Impact factor: 5.315

7.  Elastic registration of multimodal prostate MRI and histology via multiattribute combined mutual information.

Authors:  Jonathan Chappelow; B Nicolas Bloch; Neil Rofsky; Elizabeth Genega; Robert Lenkinski; William DeWolf; Anant Madabhushi
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2011-04       Impact factor: 4.071

8.  Determination of the cutoff level of apparent diffusion coefficient values for detection of prostate cancer.

Authors:  Masako Nagayama; Yuji Watanabe; Akito Terai; Tohru Araki; Kenji Notohara; Akira Okumura; Yoshiki Amoh; Takayoshi Ishimori; Satoru Nakashita; Yoshihiro Dodo
Journal:  Jpn J Radiol       Date:  2011-09-01       Impact factor: 2.374

9.  The role of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in prostate cancer imaging and staging at 1.5 and 3 Tesla: the Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (BIDMC) approach.

Authors:  B Nicolas Bloch; Robert E Lenkinski; Neil M Rofsky
Journal:  Cancer Biomark       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 4.388

Review 10.  Multidisciplinary functional MR imaging for prostate cancer.

Authors:  Jeong Kon Kim; Yun-Jin Jang; Gyunggoo Cho
Journal:  Korean J Radiol       Date:  2009 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 3.500

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.