PURPOSE: We determined the prostate cancer detection rate of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging at 3T. Precise one-to-one histopathological correlation with magnetic resonance imaging was possible using prostate magnetic resonance imaging based custom printed specimen molds after radical prostatectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This institutional review board approved prospective study included 45 patients (mean age 60.2 years, range 49 to 75) with a mean prostate specific antigen of 6.37 ng/ml (range 2.3 to 23.7) who had biopsy proven prostate cancer (mean Gleason score of 6.7, range 6 to 9). Before prostatectomy all patients underwent prostate magnetic resonance imaging using endorectal and surface coils on a 3T scanner, which included triplane T2-weighted magnetic resonance imaging, apparent diffusion coefficient maps of diffusion weighted magnetic resonance imaging, dynamic contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging and spectroscopy. The prostate specimen was whole mount sectioned in a customized mold, allowing geometric alignment to magnetic resonance imaging. Tumors were mapped on magnetic resonance imaging and histopathology. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value of magnetic resonance imaging for cancer detection were calculated. In addition, the effects of tumor size and Gleason score on the sensitivity of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging were evaluated. RESULTS: The positive predictive value of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging to detect prostate cancer was 98%, 98% and 100% in the overall prostate, peripheral zone and central gland, respectively. The sensitivity of magnetic resonance imaging sequences was higher for tumors larger than 5 mm in diameter as well as for those with higher Gleason scores (greater than 7, p <0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Prostate magnetic resonance imaging at 3T allows for the detection of prostate cancer. A multiparametric approach increases the predictive power of magnetic resonance imaging for diagnosis. In this study accurate correlation between multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and histopathology was obtained by the patient specific, magnetic resonance imaging based mold technique.
PURPOSE: We determined the prostate cancer detection rate of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging at 3T. Precise one-to-one histopathological correlation with magnetic resonance imaging was possible using prostate magnetic resonance imaging based custom printed specimen molds after radical prostatectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This institutional review board approved prospective study included 45 patients (mean age 60.2 years, range 49 to 75) with a mean prostate specific antigen of 6.37 ng/ml (range 2.3 to 23.7) who had biopsy proven prostate cancer (mean Gleason score of 6.7, range 6 to 9). Before prostatectomy all patients underwent prostate magnetic resonance imaging using endorectal and surface coils on a 3T scanner, which included triplane T2-weighted magnetic resonance imaging, apparent diffusion coefficient maps of diffusion weighted magnetic resonance imaging, dynamic contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging and spectroscopy. The prostate specimen was whole mount sectioned in a customized mold, allowing geometric alignment to magnetic resonance imaging. Tumors were mapped on magnetic resonance imaging and histopathology. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value of magnetic resonance imaging for cancer detection were calculated. In addition, the effects of tumor size and Gleason score on the sensitivity of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging were evaluated. RESULTS: The positive predictive value of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging to detect prostate cancer was 98%, 98% and 100% in the overall prostate, peripheral zone and central gland, respectively. The sensitivity of magnetic resonance imaging sequences was higher for tumors larger than 5 mm in diameter as well as for those with higher Gleason scores (greater than 7, p <0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Prostate magnetic resonance imaging at 3T allows for the detection of prostate cancer. A multiparametric approach increases the predictive power of magnetic resonance imaging for diagnosis. In this study accurate correlation between multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and histopathology was obtained by the patient specific, magnetic resonance imaging based mold technique.
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: J Scheidler; H Hricak; D B Vigneron; K K Yu; D L Sokolov; L R Huang; C J Zaloudek; S J Nelson; P R Carroll; J Kurhanewicz Journal: Radiology Date: 1999-11 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Sophie F Riches; Geoffrey S Payne; Veronica A Morgan; Samir Sandhu; Cyril Fisher; Michael Germuska; David J Collins; Alan Thompson; Nandita M deSouza Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2009-12 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Andrew B Rosenkrantz; Jeffry Neil; Xiangtian Kong; Jonathan Melamed; James S Babb; Samir S Taneja; Bachir Taouli Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2010-02 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Iclal Ocak; Marcelino Bernardo; Greg Metzger; Tristan Barrett; Peter Pinto; Paul S Albert; Peter L Choyke Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2007-10 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Andriy Fedorov; Sang-Eun Song; Tina Kapur; Robert Owen; Emily Neubauer Sugar; Paul Nguyen; William M Wells; Clare M Tempany Journal: Clin Image Based Proced Date: 2014
Authors: Anthony N Hoang; Dmitry Volkin; Nitin K Yerram; Srinivas Vourganti; Jeffrey Nix; W Marston Linehan; Bradford Wood; Peter A Pinto Journal: Curr Opin Urol Date: 2012-07 Impact factor: 2.309
Authors: Soroush Rais-Bahrami; Barış Türkbey; Ardeshir R Rastinehad; Annerleim Walton-Diaz; Anthony N Hoang; M Minhaj Siddiqui; Lambros Stamatakis; Hong Truong; Jeffrey W Nix; Srinivas Vourganti; Kinzya B Grant; Maria J Merino; Peter L Choyke; Peter A Pinto Journal: Diagn Interv Radiol Date: 2014 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 2.630
Authors: Berrend G Muller; Jurgen J Fütterer; Rajan T Gupta; Aaron Katz; Alexander Kirkham; John Kurhanewicz; Judd W Moul; Peter A Pinto; Ardeshir R Rastinehad; Cary Robertson; Jean de la Rosette; Rafael Sanchez-Salas; J Stephen Jones; Osamu Ukimura; Sadhna Verma; Hessel Wijkstra; Michael Marberger Journal: BJU Int Date: 2013-11-13 Impact factor: 5.588
Authors: Sandeep Sankineni; Arvin K George; Anna M Brown; Soroush Rais-Bahrami; Bradford J Wood; Maria J Merino; Peter A Pinto; Peter L Choyke; Baris Turkbey Journal: Abdom Imaging Date: 2015-10