Gonzalo Romero1, Bryan R Foster1, David R Pettersson1, Alice W Fung1, Alexander R Guimaraes1, Fergus V Coakley2. 1. Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Oregon Health & Science University, 3181 SW Sam Jackson Park Road, Mail Code: L340, Portland, OR 97239. 2. Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Oregon Health & Science University, 3181 SW Sam Jackson Park Road, Mail Code: L340, Portland, OR 97239. Electronic address: coakleyf@ohsu.edu.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate the incremental effect of perfusion imaging on biopsy target identification at endorectal multiparametric prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively 52 patients who underwent endorectal multiparametric prostate MRI for suspected or untreated prostate cancer. Two readers independently identified biopsy targets without and with perfusion images. RESULTS: Reader 1 identified 36 targets without and 39 targets with perfusion imaging (P>.05). The corresponding numbers for reader 2 were 38 and 38, respectively (P=.5). CONCLUSION: Perfusion imaging does not significantly increase the number of biopsy targets identified at endorectal multiparametric prostate MRI.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the incremental effect of perfusion imaging on biopsy target identification at endorectal multiparametric prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively 52 patients who underwent endorectal multiparametric prostate MRI for suspected or untreated prostate cancer. Two readers independently identified biopsy targets without and with perfusion images. RESULTS: Reader 1 identified 36 targets without and 39 targets with perfusion imaging (P>.05). The corresponding numbers for reader 2 were 38 and 38, respectively (P=.5). CONCLUSION: Perfusion imaging does not significantly increase the number of biopsy targets identified at endorectal multiparametric prostate MRI.
Authors: David A Lieberman; Douglas K Rex; Sidney J Winawer; Francis M Giardiello; David A Johnson; Theodore R Levin Journal: Gastroenterology Date: 2012-07-03 Impact factor: 22.682
Authors: H Ballentine Carter; Peter C Albertsen; Michael J Barry; Ruth Etzioni; Stephen J Freedland; Kirsten Lynn Greene; Lars Holmberg; Philip Kantoff; Badrinath R Konety; Mohammad Hassan Murad; David F Penson; Anthony L Zietman Journal: J Urol Date: 2013-05-06 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Caroline M Moore; Nicola L Robertson; Nasr Arsanious; Thomas Middleton; Arnauld Villers; Laurence Klotz; Samir S Taneja; Mark Emberton Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2012-06-13 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Adam J Jung; Antonio C Westphalen; John Kurhanewicz; Zhen J Wang; Peter R Carroll; Jeffry P Simko; Fergus V Coakley Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2013-10-31 Impact factor: 4.813
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
Authors: Morgan R Pokorny; Maarten de Rooij; Earl Duncan; Fritz H Schröder; Robert Parkinson; Jelle O Barentsz; Leslie C Thompson Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2014-03-14 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: M Minhaj Siddiqui; Soroush Rais-Bahrami; Hong Truong; Lambros Stamatakis; Srinivas Vourganti; Jeffrey Nix; Anthony N Hoang; Annerleim Walton-Diaz; Brian Shuch; Michael Weintraub; Jochen Kruecker; Hayet Amalou; Baris Turkbey; Maria J Merino; Peter L Choyke; Bradford J Wood; Peter A Pinto Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2013-06-12 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Francesca De Piano; Valentina Buscarino; Dulia Maresca; Patrick Maisonneuve; Giovanni Aletti; Roberta Lazzari; Andrea Vavassori; Massimo Bellomi; Stefania Rizzo Journal: Radiol Med Date: 2019-08-31 Impact factor: 3.469
Authors: Benjamin Addicott; Bryan R Foster; Chenara Johnson; Alice Fung; Christopher L Amling; Fergus V Coakley Journal: Transl Androl Urol Date: 2017-06