Kristin K Porter1, Alex King2, Samuel J Galgano2, Rachael L Sherrer3, Jennifer B Gordetsky3,4, Soroush Rais-Bahrami2,3,5. 1. Department of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA. kkporter@uabmc.edu. 2. Department of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA. 3. Department of Urology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA. 4. Department of Pathology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA. 5. O'Neal Comprehensive Cancer Center at UAB, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MP-MRI) targeted biopsy has been shown to identify more clinically-significant cancers and reduce the detection of clinically-insignificant disease when compared to systematic biopsy; however, the wide-spread accessibility of MP-MRI is limited. A potential strategy for reducing the cost, study time, and contrast-associated risks associated with MP-MRI is elimination of the dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) sequence, relying instead on biparametric MRI (BP-MRI). BP-MRI has been shown to have a diagnostic accuracy and cancer detection rate that are equivalent to those of MP-MRI. METHODS: We modeled the potential cost of BP-MRI compared to MP-MRI to determine what cost savings would occur if DCE was eliminated from these studies. RESULTS: When controlled for a 45 min time window that allows for one full MP-MRI or three full BP-MRI studies, the BP-MRI 45 min gross profit is $1531.32. This is an increase in gross profit of $892.58 for the 45 min time window or $10,710.98 in a 9-h business day when performing BP-MRI compared to MP-MRI for prostate cancer detection. CONCLUSIONS: BP-MRI has the potential to result in substantial cost benefit and increased access to MRI in the diagnostic workflow and risk-stratification of men being evaluated for prostate cancer when compared to conventional MP-MRI.
BACKGROUND: Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MP-MRI) targeted biopsy has been shown to identify more clinically-significant cancers and reduce the detection of clinically-insignificant disease when compared to systematic biopsy; however, the wide-spread accessibility of MP-MRI is limited. A potential strategy for reducing the cost, study time, and contrast-associated risks associated with MP-MRI is elimination of the dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) sequence, relying instead on biparametric MRI (BP-MRI). BP-MRI has been shown to have a diagnostic accuracy and cancer detection rate that are equivalent to those of MP-MRI. METHODS: We modeled the potential cost of BP-MRI compared to MP-MRI to determine what cost savings would occur if DCE was eliminated from these studies. RESULTS: When controlled for a 45 min time window that allows for one full MP-MRI or three full BP-MRI studies, the BP-MRI 45 min gross profit is $1531.32. This is an increase in gross profit of $892.58 for the 45 min time window or $10,710.98 in a 9-h business day when performing BP-MRI compared to MP-MRI for prostate cancer detection. CONCLUSIONS: BP-MRI has the potential to result in substantial cost benefit and increased access to MRI in the diagnostic workflow and risk-stratification of men being evaluated for prostate cancer when compared to conventional MP-MRI.
Authors: Maria A Gosein; Dylan Narinesingh; Shastri Motilal; Adrian P Ramkissoon; Cristal M Goetz; Kristy Sadho; Murrie D Mosodeen; Renee Banfield Journal: Radiol Imaging Cancer Date: 2020-07-31
Authors: Alexander P Cole; Bjoern J Langbein; Francesco Giganti; Fiona M Fennessy; Clare M Tempany; Mark Emberton Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2021-12-16 Impact factor: 3.039
Authors: Rachael L Sherrer; Zachary A Glaser; Jennifer B Gordetsky; Jeffrey W Nix; Kristin K Porter; Soroush Rais-Bahrami Journal: Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis Date: 2018-11-09 Impact factor: 5.554
Authors: Laurence Klotz; Giovanni Lughezzani; Davide Maffei; Andrea Sánchez; José Gregorio Pereira; Frédéric Staerman; Hannes Cash; Ferdinand Luger; Laurent Lopez; Rafael Sanchez-Salas; Rob Abouassaly; Neal D Shore; Gregg Eure; Marco Paciotti; Ander Astobieta; Laura Wiemer; Sebastian Hofbauer; Robin Heckmann; Andreas Gusenleitner; Jasmin Kaar; Clemens Mayr; Wolfgang Loidl; Jean Rouffilange; Richard Gaston; Xavier Cathelineau; Eric Klein Journal: Can Urol Assoc J Date: 2021-01 Impact factor: 1.862
Authors: Tae Il Noh; Jong Hyun Tae; Hyung Keun Kim; Ji Sung Shim; Sung Gu Kang; Deuk Jae Sung; Jun Cheon; Jeong Gu Lee; Seok Ho Kang Journal: Cancer Res Treat Date: 2020-02-10 Impact factor: 4.679
Authors: Boshen Jiao; Roman Gulati; Nathaniel Hendrix; John L Gore; Soroush Rais-Bahrami; Todd M Morgan; Ruth Etzioni Journal: Value Health Date: 2021-04-22 Impact factor: 5.101