Literature DB >> 28394755

Prostate Cancer: Diffusion-weighted MR Imaging for Detection and Assessment of Aggressiveness-Comparison between Conventional and Kurtosis Models.

Tsutomu Tamada1, Vinay Prabhu1, Jianhong Li1, James S Babb1, Samir S Taneja1, Andrew B Rosenkrantz1.   

Abstract

Purpose To compare standard diffusion-weighted (DW) imaging and diffusion kurtosis (DK) imaging for prostate cancer (PC) detection and characterization in a large patient cohort, with attention to the potential added value of DK imaging. Materials and Methods This retrospective institutional review board-approved study received a waiver of informed consent. Two hundred eighty-five patients with PC underwent 3.0-T phased-array coil prostate magnetic resonance (MR) imaging, including a DK imaging sequence (b values 0, 500, 1000, 1500, and 2000 sec/mm2) before prostatectomy. Maps of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) and diffusional kurtosis (K) were derived by using maximal b values of 1000 and 2000 sec/mm2, respectively. Mean ADC and K were obtained from volumes of interest (VOIs) placed on each patient's dominant tumor and benign prostate tissue. Metrics were compared between benign and malignant tissue, between Gleason score (GS) ≤ 3 + 3 and GS ≥ 3 + 4 tumors, and between GS ≤ 3 + 4 and GS ≥ 4 + 3 tumors by using paired t tests, analysis of variance, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis, and exact tests. Results ADC and K showed significant differences for benign versus tumor tissues, GS ≤ 3 + 3 versus GS ≥ 3 + 4 tumors, and GS ≤ 3 + 4 versus GS ≥ 4 + 3 tumors (P < .001 for all). ADC and K were highly correlated (r = -0.82; P < .001). Area under the ROC curve was significantly higher (P = .002) for ADC (0.921) than for K (0.902) for benign versus malignant tissue but was similar for GS ≤ 3 + 3 versus GS ≥ 3 + 4 tumors (0.715-0.744) and GS ≤ 3 + 4 versus GS ≥ 4 + 3 tumors (0.694-0.720) (P > .15). ADC and K were concordant for these various outcomes in 80.0%-88.6% of patients; among patients with discordant results, ADC showed better performance than K for GS ≤ 3 + 4 versus GS ≥ 4 + 3 tumors (P = .016) and was similar to K for other outcomes (P > .136). Conclusion ADC and K were highly correlated, had similar diagnostic performance, and were concordant for the various outcomes in the large majority of cases. These observations did not show a clear added value of DK imaging compared with standard DW imaging for clinical PC evaluation. © RSNA, 2017 Online supplemental material is available for this article.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28394755     DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2017162321

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiology        ISSN: 0033-8419            Impact factor:   11.105


  21 in total

1.  Management of prostate cancer: NYU Case of the Month, July 2017.

Authors:  Samir S Taneja
Journal:  Rev Urol       Date:  2017

2.  Staging liver fibrosis with DWI: is there an added value for diffusion kurtosis imaging?

Authors:  Li Yang; Shengxiang Rao; Wentao Wang; Caizhong Chen; Ying Ding; Chun Yang; Robert Grimm; Xu Yan; Caixia Fu; Mengsu Zeng
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2018-01-30       Impact factor: 5.315

3.  Clinical impact of ultra-high b-value (3000 s/mm2) diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging in prostate cancer at 3T: comparison with b-value of 2000 s/mm2.

Authors:  Tsutomu Tamada; Ayumu Kido; Yu Ueda; Mitsuru Takeuchi; Takeshi Fukunaga; Teruki Sone; Akira Yamamoto
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2021-09-24       Impact factor: 3.039

Review 4.  Diffusion and quantification of diffusion of prostate cancer.

Authors:  Yoshiko Ueno; Tsutomu Tamada; Keitaro Sofue; Takamichi Murakami
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2021-09-19       Impact factor: 3.039

5.  Reduced field-of-view and multi-shot DWI acquisition techniques: Prospective evaluation of image quality and distortion reduction in prostate cancer imaging.

Authors:  Edward M Lawrence; Yuxin Zhang; Jitka Starekova; Zihan Wang; Ali Pirasteh; Shane A Wells; Diego Hernando
Journal:  Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2022-08-06       Impact factor: 3.130

Review 6.  Diffusion-weighted imaging in prostate cancer.

Authors:  Tsutomu Tamada; Yu Ueda; Yoshiko Ueno; Yuichi Kojima; Ayumu Kido; Akira Yamamoto
Journal:  MAGMA       Date:  2021-09-07       Impact factor: 2.533

7.  Diagnostic evaluation of magnetization transfer and diffusion kurtosis imaging for prostate cancer detection in a re-biopsy population.

Authors:  Tristan Barrett; Mary McLean; Andrew N Priest; Edward M Lawrence; Andrew J Patterson; Brendan C Koo; Ilse Patterson; Anne Y Warren; Andrew Doble; Vincent J Gnanapragasam; Christof Kastner; Ferdia A Gallagher
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2017-12-08       Impact factor: 5.315

8.  Histogram Analysis of Diffusion Kurtosis Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Diagnosis of Hepatic Fibrosis.

Authors:  Ruo-Fan Sheng; Kai-Pu Jin; Li Yang; He-Qing Wang; Hao Liu; Yuan Ji; Cai-Xia Fu; Meng-Su Zeng
Journal:  Korean J Radiol       Date:  2018-08-06       Impact factor: 3.500

9.  Low-to-high b value DWI ratio approaches in multiparametric MRI of the prostate: feasibility, optimal combination of b values, and comparison with ADC maps for the visual presentation of prostate cancer.

Authors:  Yin Xi; Alexander Liu; Franklin Olumba; Parker Lawson; Daniel N Costa; Qing Yuan; Gaurav Khatri; Takeshi Yokoo; Ivan Pedrosa; Robert E Lenkinski
Journal:  Quant Imaging Med Surg       Date:  2018-07

Review 10.  Diffusion weighted imaging of the prostate-principles, application, and advances.

Authors:  Martin H Maurer; Johannes T Heverhagen
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2017-06
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.