T Ullrich1, M Quentin2, C Oelers3, F Dietzel4, L M Sawicki5, C Arsov6, R Rabenalt7, P Albers8, G Antoch9, D Blondin10, H J Wittsack11, L Schimmöller12. 1. University Dusseldorf, Medical Faculty, Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Moorenstr. 5, D-40225 Dusseldorf, Germany. Electronic address: Tim.Ullrich@med.uni-duesseldorf.de. 2. University Dusseldorf, Medical Faculty, Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Moorenstr. 5, D-40225 Dusseldorf, Germany. Electronic address: michael.quentin@gmx.de. 3. University Dusseldorf, Medical Faculty, Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Moorenstr. 5, D-40225 Dusseldorf, Germany. Electronic address: Ch.oelers@hotmail.de. 4. University Dusseldorf, Medical Faculty, Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Moorenstr. 5, D-40225 Dusseldorf, Germany. Electronic address: Frederic.Dietzel@med.uni-duesseldorf.de. 5. University Dusseldorf, Medical Faculty, Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Moorenstr. 5, D-40225 Dusseldorf, Germany. Electronic address: LinoMorris.Sawicki@med.uni-duesseldorf.de. 6. University Dusseldorf, Medical Faculty, Department of Urology, Moorenstr. 5, D-40225 Dusseldorf, Germany. Electronic address: Christian.Arsov@med.uni-duesseldorf.de. 7. University Dusseldorf, Medical Faculty, Department of Urology, Moorenstr. 5, D-40225 Dusseldorf, Germany. Electronic address: Robert.Rabenalt@med.uni-duesseldorf.de. 8. University Dusseldorf, Medical Faculty, Department of Urology, Moorenstr. 5, D-40225 Dusseldorf, Germany. Electronic address: Peter.Albers@med.uni-duesseldorf.de. 9. University Dusseldorf, Medical Faculty, Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Moorenstr. 5, D-40225 Dusseldorf, Germany. Electronic address: Antoch@med.uni-duesseldorf.de. 10. University Dusseldorf, Medical Faculty, Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Moorenstr. 5, D-40225 Dusseldorf, Germany. Electronic address: Dirk.Blondin@sk-mg.de. 11. University Dusseldorf, Medical Faculty, Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Moorenstr. 5, D-40225 Dusseldorf, Germany. Electronic address: Hans-Joerg.wittsack@med.uni-duesseldorf.de. 12. University Dusseldorf, Medical Faculty, Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Moorenstr. 5, D-40225 Dusseldorf, Germany. Electronic address: Lars.Schimmoeller@med.uni-duesseldorf.de.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This study prospectively evaluates objective image quality (IQ), subjective IQ, and PI-RADS scoring of prostate MRI at 3.0T (3T) and 1.5T (1.5T) within the same patients. METHODS: Sixty-three consecutive patients (64±9years) were prospectively included in this non-inferiority trial, powered at 80% to demonstrate a ≤10% difference in signal-to-noise (SNR) and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) of T2-weighted and diffusion-weighted imaging (T2WI, DWI) at 1.5T compared to 3T. Secondary endpoints were analysis of subjective IQ and PI-RADS v2 scoring. RESULTS: All patients received multi-parametric prostate MRI on a 3T (T2WI, DWI, DCE) and bi-parametric MRI (T2WI, DWI) on a 1.5T scanner using body coils, respectively. SNR and CNR of T2WI were similar at 1.5T and 3T (p=0.7-1), but of DWI significantly lower at 1.5T (p<0.01). Subjective IQ was significantly better at 3T for both, T2WI and DWI (p<0.01). PI-RADS scores were comparable for both field strengths (p=0.05-1). Inter-reader agreement was excellent for subjective IQ assessment and PI-RADS scoring (k=0.9-1). CONCLUSION: Prostate MRI at 1.5T can reveal comparable objective image quality in T2WI, but is inferior to 3T in DWI and subjective IQ. However, similar PI-RADS scoring and thus diagnostic performance seems feasible independent of the field strength even without an endorectal coil.
OBJECTIVES: This study prospectively evaluates objective image quality (IQ), subjective IQ, and PI-RADS scoring of prostate MRI at 3.0T (3T) and 1.5T (1.5T) within the same patients. METHODS: Sixty-three consecutive patients (64±9years) were prospectively included in this non-inferiority trial, powered at 80% to demonstrate a ≤10% difference in signal-to-noise (SNR) and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) of T2-weighted and diffusion-weighted imaging (T2WI, DWI) at 1.5T compared to 3T. Secondary endpoints were analysis of subjective IQ and PI-RADS v2 scoring. RESULTS: All patients received multi-parametric prostate MRI on a 3T (T2WI, DWI, DCE) and bi-parametric MRI (T2WI, DWI) on a 1.5T scanner using body coils, respectively. SNR and CNR of T2WI were similar at 1.5T and 3T (p=0.7-1), but of DWI significantly lower at 1.5T (p<0.01). Subjective IQ was significantly better at 3T for both, T2WI and DWI (p<0.01). PI-RADS scores were comparable for both field strengths (p=0.05-1). Inter-reader agreement was excellent for subjective IQ assessment and PI-RADS scoring (k=0.9-1). CONCLUSION: Prostate MRI at 1.5T can reveal comparable objective image quality in T2WI, but is inferior to 3T in DWI and subjective IQ. However, similar PI-RADS scoring and thus diagnostic performance seems feasible independent of the field strength even without an endorectal coil.
Authors: Armando Stabile; Francesco Giganti; Andrew B Rosenkrantz; Samir S Taneja; Geert Villeirs; Inderbir S Gill; Clare Allen; Mark Emberton; Caroline M Moore; Veeru Kasivisvanathan Journal: Nat Rev Urol Date: 2019-07-17 Impact factor: 14.432
Authors: Richard C Wu; Amir H Lebastchi; Boris A Hadaschik; Mark Emberton; Caroline Moore; Pilar Laguna; Jurgen J Fütterer; Arvin K George Journal: World J Urol Date: 2021-01-04 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Daniel Junker; Fabian Steinkohl; Veronika Fritz; Jasmin Bektic; Theodoros Tokas; Friedrich Aigner; Thomas R W Herrmann; Michael Rieger; Udo Nagele Journal: World J Urol Date: 2018-08-04 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Annerleim Walton-Diaz; Manuel Madariaga-Venegas; Nicolas Aviles; Juan Carlos Roman; Ivan Gallegos; Mauricio Burotto Journal: Curr Urol Rep Date: 2019-09-02 Impact factor: 3.092
Authors: T Ullrich; M Quentin; A K Schmaltz; C Arsov; C Rubbert; D Blondin; R Rabenalt; P Albers; G Antoch; L Schimmöller Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2017-07-07 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Jakob Schlegel; Stefan Hinz; Karsten Günzel; Ahmed Magheli; Jonas Busch; Eduard Baco; Hannes Cash; Stefan Heinrich; Daniela Edler; Martin Schostak; Hendrik Borgmann Journal: Int Urol Nephrol Date: 2022-07-25 Impact factor: 2.266
Authors: Borna K Barth; Niels J Rupp; Alexander Cornelius; Daniel Nanz; Rainer Grobholz; Martin Schmidtpeter; Peter J Wild; Daniel Eberli; Olivio F Donati Journal: Curr Urol Date: 2019-03-08
Authors: Armando Stabile; Francesco Giganti; Veeru Kasivisvanathan; Gianluca Giannarini; Caroline M Moore; Anwar R Padhani; Valeria Panebianco; Andrew B Rosenkrantz; Georg Salomon; Baris Turkbey; Geert Villeirs; Jelle O Barentsz Journal: Eur Urol Oncol Date: 2020-03-17