PURPOSE: To determine the changes in prostate shape and volume after the introduction of an endorectal coil (ERC) by means of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) at 3T. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A total of 44 consecutive patients with biopsy-proven prostate cancer underwent separate MRI examinations at 3T with a body array coil and subsequently with an ERC inflated with 50 mL of fluid. Prospectively, two experienced readers independently evaluated all data sets in random order. The maximal anteroposterior, right-to-left, and craniocaudal prostate diameters, as well as the total prostate and peripheral zone and central gland volumes were measured before and after ERC introduction. The changes in prostate shape and volume were analyzed using Wilcoxon's test for paired samples. RESULTS: The introduction of the ERC significantly changed the prostate shape in all three directions, with mean changes in the anteroposterior, right-to-left, and craniocaudal diameters of 15.7% (5.5 mm), 7.7% (3.5 mm), and 6.3% (2.2 mm), respectively. The mean total prostate, peripheral zone, and central gland volume decreased significantly after ERC introduction by 17.9% (8.3 cm(3)), 21.6% (4.8 cm(3)), and 14.2% (3.4 cm(3)), respectively. CONCLUSION: ERC introduction as observed by 3T MRI changed the prostate shape and volume significantly. The mean anteroposterior diameter was reduced by nearly one-sixth of its original diameter, and the mean total prostate volume was decreased by approximately 18%. This could cause difficulties and should be considered when using ERC-based MRI for MRI-computed tomography fusion and radiotherapy planning.
PURPOSE: To determine the changes in prostate shape and volume after the introduction of an endorectal coil (ERC) by means of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) at 3T. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A total of 44 consecutive patients with biopsy-proven prostate cancer underwent separate MRI examinations at 3T with a body array coil and subsequently with an ERC inflated with 50 mL of fluid. Prospectively, two experienced readers independently evaluated all data sets in random order. The maximal anteroposterior, right-to-left, and craniocaudal prostate diameters, as well as the total prostate and peripheral zone and central gland volumes were measured before and after ERC introduction. The changes in prostate shape and volume were analyzed using Wilcoxon's test for paired samples. RESULTS: The introduction of the ERC significantly changed the prostate shape in all three directions, with mean changes in the anteroposterior, right-to-left, and craniocaudal diameters of 15.7% (5.5 mm), 7.7% (3.5 mm), and 6.3% (2.2 mm), respectively. The mean total prostate, peripheral zone, and central gland volume decreased significantly after ERC introduction by 17.9% (8.3 cm(3)), 21.6% (4.8 cm(3)), and 14.2% (3.4 cm(3)), respectively. CONCLUSION: ERC introduction as observed by 3T MRI changed the prostate shape and volume significantly. The mean anteroposterior diameter was reduced by nearly one-sixth of its original diameter, and the mean total prostate volume was decreased by approximately 18%. This could cause difficulties and should be considered when using ERC-based MRI for MRI-computed tomography fusion and radiotherapy planning.
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
Authors: Andriy Fedorov; Kemal Tuncali; Fiona M Fennessy; Junichi Tokuda; Nobuhiko Hata; William M Wells; Ron Kikinis; Clare M Tempany Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2012-05-29 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Vijay Shah; Thomas Pohida; Baris Turkbey; Haresh Mani; Maria Merino; Peter A Pinto; Peter Choyke; Marcelino Bernardo Journal: Rev Sci Instrum Date: 2009-10 Impact factor: 1.523
Authors: Graham R Hale; Marcin Czarniecki; Alexis Cheng; Jonathan B Bloom; Reza Seifabadi; Samuel A Gold; Kareem N Rayn; Vikram K Sabarwal; Sherif Mehralivand; Peter L Choyke; Baris Turkbey; Brad Wood; Peter A Pinto Journal: J Urol Date: 2018-06-22 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Y Mazaheri; A A Afaq; S I Jung; D A Goldman; L Wang; H Aslan; M J Zelefsky; O Akin; H Hricak Journal: Clin Radiol Date: 2014-12-29 Impact factor: 2.350