Literature DB >> 25062923

Assessment of change in prostate volume and shape following surgical resection through co-registration of in-vivo MRI and fresh specimen ex-vivo MRI.

C Orczyk1, S S Taneja2, H Rusinek2, A B Rosenkrantz3.   

Abstract

AIM: To compare the size and shape of the prostate between in-vivo and fresh ex-vivo magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), in order to quantify alterations in the prostate resulting from surgical resection. MATERIAL AND
METHOD: Ten patients who had undergone 3 T prostate MRI using a phased-array coil and who were scheduled for prostatectomy were included in this prospective study. The ex-vivo specimen underwent MRI prior to formalin fixation or any other histopathological processing. Prostate volume in vivo and ex vivo was assessed using planimetry. Prostate shape was assessed by calculating ratios between the diameters of the prostate in all three dimensions.
RESULTS: Mean prostate volume was significantly smaller ex vivo than in vivo (39.7 ± 18.6 versus 50.8 ± 26.8 cm(3); p = 0.008), with an average change in volume of -19.5%. The right-to-left (RL)/anteroposterior (AP) ratio of the prostate, representing the shape of the prostate within its axial plane, was significantly larger ex vivo than in vivo (1.33 ± 0.14 versus 1.21 ± 0.12; p = 0.015), with an average percent change in RL/AP ratio of the prostate of +12.2%. There was no significant difference between in-vivo and ex-vivo acquisitions in terms of craniocaudal (CC)/AP (p = 0.963, median change = -2.1%) or RL/CC (p = 0.265, median change = +1.3%) ratios.
CONCLUSION: The observed volume and shape change following resection has not previously been assessed by comparison of in-vivo and fresh ex-vivo MRI and likely represents loss of vascularity and of connective tissue attachments in the ex-vivo state. These findings have implications for co-registration platforms under development to facilitate improved understanding of the accuracy of MRI in spatial localization of prostate tumours.
Copyright © 2014 The Royal College of Radiologists. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25062923      PMCID: PMC4673982          DOI: 10.1016/j.crad.2014.06.012

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Radiol        ISSN: 0009-9260            Impact factor:   2.350


  21 in total

Review 1.  International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Handling and Staging of Radical Prostatectomy Specimens. Working group 4: seminal vesicles and lymph nodes.

Authors:  Daniel M Berney; Thomas M Wheeler; David J Grignon; Jonathan I Epstein; David F Griffiths; Peter A Humphrey; Theo van der Kwast; Rodolfo Montironi; Brett Delahunt; Lars Egevad; John R Srigley
Journal:  Mod Pathol       Date:  2010-09-03       Impact factor: 7.842

2.  Preliminary experience with a novel method of three-dimensional co-registration of prostate cancer digital histology and in vivo multiparametric MRI.

Authors:  C Orczyk; H Rusinek; A B Rosenkrantz; A Mikheev; F-M Deng; J Melamed; S S Taneja
Journal:  Clin Radiol       Date:  2013-08-28       Impact factor: 2.350

3.  Semi-automatic deformable registration of prostate MR images to pathological slices.

Authors:  Yousef Mazaheri; Louisa Bokacheva; Dirk-Jan Kroon; Oguz Akin; Hedvig Hricak; Daniel Chamudot; Samson Fine; Jason A Koutcher
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 4.813

4.  Prostate cancer: multiparametric MRI for index lesion localization--a multiple-reader study.

Authors:  Andrew B Rosenkrantz; Fang-Ming Deng; Sooah Kim; Ruth P Lim; Nicole Hindman; Thais C Mussi; Bradley Spieler; Jason Oaks; James S Babb; Jonathan Melamed; Samir S Taneja
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2012-10       Impact factor: 3.959

5.  Pulmonary Nodules: growth rate assessment in patients by using serial CT and three-dimensional volumetry.

Authors:  Jane P Ko; Erika J Berman; Manmeen Kaur; James S Babb; Elan Bomsztyk; Alissa K Greenberg; David P Naidich; Henry Rusinek
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2011-12-09       Impact factor: 11.105

6.  Dynamic contrast enhanced, pelvic phased array magnetic resonance imaging of localized prostate cancer for predicting tumor volume: correlation with radical prostatectomy findings.

Authors:  Arnauld Villers; Philippe Puech; Damien Mouton; Xavier Leroy; Charles Ballereau; Laurent Lemaitre
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 7.450

7.  Correlation of magnetic resonance imaging tumor volume with histopathology.

Authors:  Baris Turkbey; Haresh Mani; Omer Aras; Ardeshir R Rastinehad; Vijay Shah; Marcelino Bernardo; Thomas Pohida; Dagane Daar; Compton Benjamin; Yolanda L McKinney; W Marston Linehan; Bradford J Wood; Maria J Merino; Peter L Choyke; Peter A Pinto
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2012-08-15       Impact factor: 7.450

8.  Prostate tumor volume measurement with combined T2-weighted imaging and diffusion-weighted MR: correlation with pathologic tumor volume.

Authors:  Yousef Mazaheri; Hedvig Hricak; Samson W Fine; Oguz Akin; Amita Shukla-Dave; Nicole M Ishill; Chaya S Moskowitz; Joanna E Grater; Victor E Reuter; Kristen L Zakian; Karim A Touijer; Jason A Koutcher
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2009-08       Impact factor: 11.105

Review 9.  Current status of MRI for the diagnosis, staging and prognosis of prostate cancer: implications for focal therapy and active surveillance.

Authors:  Arnauld Villers; Laurent Lemaitre; Jérémie Haffner; Philippe Puech
Journal:  Curr Opin Urol       Date:  2009-05       Impact factor: 2.309

10.  An abbreviated standard procedure for accurate tumor volume estimation in prostate cancer.

Authors:  H P Schmid; J E McNeal
Journal:  Am J Surg Pathol       Date:  1992-02       Impact factor: 6.394

View more
  7 in total

1.  Evaluation of tongue squamous cell carcinoma resection margins using ex-vivo MR.

Authors:  Stefan C A Steens; Elise M Bekers; Willem L J Weijs; Geert J S Litjens; Andor Veltien; Arie Maat; Guido B van den Broek; Jeroen A W M van der Laak; Jürgen J Fütterer; Christina A Hulsbergen van der Kaa; Matthias A W Merkx; Robert P Takes
Journal:  Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg       Date:  2017-01-27       Impact factor: 2.924

2.  Apparatus for Histological Validation of In Vivo and Ex Vivo Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Human Prostate.

Authors:  Roger M Bourne; Colleen Bailey; Edward William Johnston; Hayley Pye; Susan Heavey; Hayley Whitaker; Bernard Siow; Alex Freeman; Greg L Shaw; Ashwin Sridhar; Thomy Mertzanidou; David J Hawkes; Daniel C Alexander; Shonit Punwani; Eleftheria Panagiotaki
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2017-03-24       Impact factor: 6.244

Review 3.  Accurate validation of ultrasound imaging of prostate cancer: a review of challenges in registration of imaging and histopathology.

Authors:  Rogier R Wildeboer; Ruud J G van Sloun; Arnoud W Postema; Christophe K Mannaerts; Maudy Gayet; Harrie P Beerlage; Hessel Wijkstra; Massimo Mischi
Journal:  J Ultrasound       Date:  2018-07-30

Review 4.  How Accurately Can Prostate Gland Imaging Measure the Prostate Gland Volume? Results of a Systematic Review.

Authors:  David R H Christie; Christopher F Sharpley
Journal:  Prostate Cancer       Date:  2019-03-03

5.  Improved co-registration of ex-vivo and in-vivo cardiovascular magnetic resonance images using heart-specific flexible 3D printed acrylic scaffold combined with non-rigid registration.

Authors:  John Whitaker; Radhouene Neji; Nicholas Byrne; Esther Puyol-Antón; Rahul K Mukherjee; Steven E Williams; Henry Chubb; Louisa O'Neill; Orod Razeghi; Adam Connolly; Kawal Rhode; Steven Niederer; Andrew King; Cory Tschabrunn; Elad Anter; Reza Nezafat; Martin J Bishop; Mark O'Neill; Reza Razavi; Sébastien Roujol
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Magn Reson       Date:  2019-10-10       Impact factor: 5.364

Review 6.  The current and future role of magnetic resonance imaging in prostate cancer detection and management.

Authors:  Jan Philipp Radtke; Dogu Teber; Markus Hohenfellner; Boris A Hadaschik
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2015-06

7.  Measurement of Prostate Volume with MRI (A Guide for the Perplexed): Biproximate Method with Analysis of Precision and Accuracy.

Authors:  Neil F Wasserman; Eric Niendorf; Benjamin Spilseth
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2020-01-17       Impact factor: 4.379

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.