Literature DB >> 22677880

Evaluation of a structured report of functional prostate magnetic resonance imaging in patients with suspicion for prostate cancer or under active surveillance.

M Quentin1, D Blondin, J Klasen, J Schek, C Buchbender, F R Miese, G Antoch, D Barski, P Albers, C Arsov.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Functional magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) seems to be a useful tool for prostate cancer (PCa) detection in patients with a previous negative biopsy but persistently increased prostate-specific antigen (PSA) values. Additionally, it enables correct cancer localization in patients with known PCa under active surveillance to avoid misclassification on repeat biopsies. Nevertheless, suspicious lesions on MRI findings need verification by biopsy. The aim of the present study was to establish a standardized functional prostate MRI reporting scheme.
METHODS: Prostate MRI with T(2)-weighted images, T(1)-weighted images, diffusion-weighted imaging, and dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI of 56 consecutive patients were performed on a 3-T scanner. Patients with prior negative random transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided biopsy and continuous suspicion for PCa as well as patients under active surveillance were included. The MRI localization report of suspicious lesions followed a standardized scheme. TRUS-guided random biopsy with addition of targeted biopsy cores was performed afterwards based on the structured report.
RESULTS: Of the 56 patients, 18 had suspicious MRI findings and subsequently underwent repeat biopsy under guidance of the standardized localization scheme. PCa was documented in 72% (13/18).
CONCLUSIONS: A standardized reporting scheme of suspicious findings on prostate MRI leads to higher success rates as compared to standard random TRUS-guided biopsy.
Copyright © 2012 S. Karger AG, Basel.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22677880     DOI: 10.1159/000338808

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Urol Int        ISSN: 0042-1138            Impact factor:   2.089


  6 in total

1.  Impact of an Information Technology-Enabled Initiative on the Quality of Prostate Multiparametric MRI Reports.

Authors:  Patricia C Silveira; Ruth Dunne; Nisha I Sainani; Ronilda Lacson; Stuart G Silverman; Clare M Tempany; Ramin Khorasani
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2015-04-08       Impact factor: 3.173

Review 2.  Targeted Prostate Biopsy: Lessons Learned Midst the Evolution of a Disruptive Technology.

Authors:  Nima Nassiri; Shyam Natarajan; Daniel J Margolis; Leonard S Marks
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2015-07-10       Impact factor: 2.649

3.  Controversies on individualized prostate cancer care: gaps in current practice.

Authors:  Steven Joniau; David Pfister; Alexandre de la Taille; Franco Gaboardi; Alan Thompson; Maria J Ribal
Journal:  Ther Adv Urol       Date:  2013-10

Review 4.  MRI-targeted prostate biopsy: a review of technique and results.

Authors:  Nicola L Robertson; Mark Emberton; Caroline M Moore
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2013-09-24       Impact factor: 14.432

Review 5.  The Study of Active Monitoring in Sweden (SAMS): a randomized study comparing two different follow-up schedules for active surveillance of low-risk prostate cancer.

Authors:  Ola Bratt; Stefan Carlsson; Erik Holmberg; Lars Holmberg; Eva Johansson; Andreas Josefsson; Annika Nilsson; Maria Nyberg; David Robinsson; Jonas Sandberg; Dag Sandblom; Pär Stattin
Journal:  Scand J Urol       Date:  2013-07-24       Impact factor: 1.612

Review 6.  State of the art in abdominal MRI structured reporting: a review.

Authors:  Arnaldo Stanzione; Francesca Boccadifuoco; Renato Cuocolo; Valeria Romeo; Pier Paolo Mainenti; Arturo Brunetti; Simone Maurea
Journal:  Abdom Radiol (NY)       Date:  2020-09-16
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.