Literature DB >> 18751745

The role of endorectal coil MRI in preoperative staging and decision-making for the treatment of clinically localized prostate cancer.

Timothy A Masterson1, Karim Touijer.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: The optimal management of newly diagnosed prostate cancer requires individualization of the treatment plan based upon the most accurate clinical characterization of tumor location and extent of disease. The role of imaging in prostate cancer staging continues to evolve. In this review, we address the utility of endorectal coil magnetic resonance imaging (eMRI) in both local staging and its ability to facilitate the decision in choosing one treatment strategy over another after the initial diagnosis of localized prostate cancer.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using the PubMed database and reference lists of key articles, we identified studies addressing the use of eMRI in tumor characterization and risk stratification in patients undergoing treatment for clinically localized prostate cancer.
RESULTS: The findings identified within 54 selected studies were incorporated into a summary discussing the current limitations in cancer staging and the role eMRI plays in both the preoperative assessment and clinical decision-making in an attempt to improve our ability to individualize management approaches and tailor treatment.
CONCLUSION: eMRI allows for more accurate local staging by complementing the existing clinical variables through improvements in spatial characterization of the prostatic zonal anatomy and molecular changes. These improvements in tumor staging enhance our ability to individualize treatment selection and tailor the approach to maximize cancer control while minimizing treatment related morbidity.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18751745     DOI: 10.1007/s10334-008-0116-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  MAGMA        ISSN: 0968-5243            Impact factor:   2.310


  53 in total

1.  Assessment of outcome prediction models for patients with localized prostate carcinoma managed with radical prostatectomy or external beam radiation therapy.

Authors:  A V D'Amico; A Desjardin; A Chung; M H Chen; D Schultz; R Whittington; S B Malkowicz; A Wein; J E Tomaszewski; A A Renshaw; K Loughlin; J P Richie
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  1998-05-15       Impact factor: 6.860

2.  Pathologic classification of prostate carcinoma: the impact of margin status.

Authors:  M L Blute; D G Bostwick; T M Seay; S K Martin; J M Slezak; E J Bergstralh; H Zincke
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  1998-03-01       Impact factor: 6.860

3.  A preoperative nomogram for disease recurrence following radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer.

Authors:  M W Kattan; J A Eastham; A M Stapleton; T M Wheeler; P T Scardino
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  1998-05-20       Impact factor: 13.506

4.  Prediction of prognosis for prostatic adenocarcinoma by combined histological grading and clinical staging.

Authors:  D F Gleason; G T Mellinger
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  1974-01       Impact factor: 7.450

5.  Percent prostate needle biopsy tissue with cancer is more predictive of biochemical failure or adverse pathology after radical prostatectomy than prostate specific antigen or Gleason score.

Authors:  Stephen J Freedland; George S Csathy; Frederick Dorey; William J Aronson
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2002-02       Impact factor: 7.450

6.  Prostate cancer: prediction of extracapsular extension with endorectal MR imaging and three-dimensional proton MR spectroscopic imaging.

Authors:  K K Yu; J Scheidler; H Hricak; D B Vigneron; C J Zaloudek; R G Males; S J Nelson; P R Carroll; J Kurhanewicz
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1999-11       Impact factor: 11.105

7.  Distinguishing clinically important from unimportant prostate cancers before treatment: value of systematic biopsies.

Authors:  Y Goto; M Ohori; A Arakawa; M W Kattan; T M Wheeler; P T Scardino
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  1996-09       Impact factor: 7.450

8.  Pathologic and clinical findings to predict tumor extent of nonpalpable (stage T1c) prostate cancer.

Authors:  J I Epstein; P C Walsh; M Carmichael; C B Brendler
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1994-02-02       Impact factor: 56.272

9.  Clinical understaging in patients with prostate adenocarcinoma submitted to radical prostatectomy: predictive value of serum chromogranin A.

Authors:  Alessandro Sciarra; Giuseppe Voria; Salvatore Monti; Luigi Mazzone; Gianna Mariotti; Mariangela Pozza; Giuseppe D'Eramo; Franco Di Silverio
Journal:  Prostate       Date:  2004-03-01       Impact factor: 4.104

10.  Prostate cancer: detection of extracapsular extension by genitourinary and general body radiologists at MR imaging.

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

View more
  8 in total

1.  Automated computer-derived prostate volumes from MR imaging data: comparison with radiologist-derived MR imaging and pathologic specimen volumes.

Authors:  Julie C Bulman; Robert Toth; Amish D Patel; B Nicolas Bloch; Colm J McMahon; Long Ngo; Anant Madabhushi; Neil M Rofsky
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2012-01       Impact factor: 11.105

2.  Characteristics of modern Gleason 9/10 prostate adenocarcinoma: a single tertiary centre experience within the Republic of Ireland.

Authors:  F O'Kelly; S Elamin; A Cahill; P Aherne; J White; J Buckley; K N O'Regan; A Brady; D G Power; M F O'Brien; P Sweeney; N Mayer; P J Kelly
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2013-10-16       Impact factor: 4.226

3.  Magnetic resonance imaging for prostate cancer clinical application.

Authors:  Bing Li; Yong Du; Hanfeng Yang; Yayong Huang; Jun Meng; Dongmei Xiao
Journal:  Chin J Cancer Res       Date:  2013-04       Impact factor: 5.087

4.  Ethnic variation in pelvimetric measures and its impact on positive surgical margins at radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Christian von Bodman; Mika P Matikainen; Luis Herran Yunis; Vincent Laudone; Peter T Scardino; Oguz Akin; Farhang Rabbani
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 2.649

5.  Accuracy of preoperative endorectal MRI in predicting extracapsular extension and influence on neurovascular bundle sparing in radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Matthias C Roethke; Matthias P Lichy; Michaela Kniess; Matthias K Werner; Claus D Claussen; Arnulf Stenzl; Heinz-Peter Schlemmer; David Schilling
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2012-01-17       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 6.  Multiparametric MRI of prostate cancer: an update on state-of-the-art techniques and their performance in detecting and localizing prostate cancer.

Authors:  John V Hegde; Robert V Mulkern; Lawrence P Panych; Fiona M Fennessy; Andriy Fedorov; Stephan E Maier; Clare M C Tempany
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2013-05       Impact factor: 4.813

7.  Preoperative prostate biopsy and multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging: reliability in detecting prostate cancer.

Authors:  Francesco Porpiglia; Filippo Russo; Matteo Manfredi; Fabrizio Mele; Cristian Fiori; Daniele Regge
Journal:  Int Braz J Urol       Date:  2015 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 1.541

8.  The potential impact of adding genetic markers to clinical parameters in managing high-risk prostate cancer patients.

Authors:  Maria Jesus Alvarez-Cubero; Luis Javier Martinez-Gonzalez; Fernando Vazquez-Alonso; Maria Saiz; Juan Carlos Alvarez; Jose Antonio Lorente; Jose Manuel Cozar
Journal:  Springerplus       Date:  2013-09-08
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.