Young Sub Lee1, Moon Hyung Choi2, Young Joon Lee2, Dongyeob Han3, Dong-Hyun Kim4. 1. Department of Hospital Pathology, Eunpyeong St. Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Republic of Korea. 2. Department of Radiology, Eunpyeong St. Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Republic of Korea. 3. Siemens Healthineers Ltd., Seoul, Republic of Korea. 4. School of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Yonsei University, Seoul, Korea.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To assess the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values and the T1 and T2 values derived from nonenhanced (NE) and contrast-enhanced (CE) magnetic resonance fingerprinting (MRF) in the prostate gland and to evaluate differences in values among prostate cancer, the normal peripheral zone (PZ) and the normal transition zone (TZ). METHODS: Fifty-seven patients (median age, 73 years; range, 48-86) with prostate cancer who underwent multiparametric MRI including NE and CE MRF were included in this study. T1 and T2 values were extracted from NE and CE MRF, respectively. Five quantitative values (the ADC, NE T1, NE T2, CE T1 and CE T2 values) were measured in three areas: prostate cancer, PZ and TZ. We compared the values among the three areas and evaluated the differences between NE MRF and CE MRF values. RESULTS: ADC values and MRF-derived values were significantly higher in PZ than prostate cancer or TZ (p < 0.001). TZ had a significantly lower CE T1 but significantly higher values of the other variables than prostate cancer (p < 0.001). The T1 values in all three areas and the T2 values in prostate cancer and TZ were significantly lower on CE MRF than on NE MRF (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Quantitative analysis of NE and CE MRI can be conducted by using the MRF technique. The ADC value and the T1 and T2 values from CE MRF and NE MRF were found to be significantly different between prostate cancer and normal prostate tissue. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: The T1 and T2 values from contrast-enhanced MR fingerprinting are significantly different between prostate cancer and normal prostate tissue.
OBJECTIVES: To assess the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values and the T1 and T2 values derived from nonenhanced (NE) and contrast-enhanced (CE) magnetic resonance fingerprinting (MRF) in the prostate gland and to evaluate differences in values among prostate cancer, the normal peripheral zone (PZ) and the normal transition zone (TZ). METHODS: Fifty-seven patients (median age, 73 years; range, 48-86) with prostate cancer who underwent multiparametric MRI including NE and CE MRF were included in this study. T1 and T2 values were extracted from NE and CE MRF, respectively. Five quantitative values (the ADC, NE T1, NE T2, CE T1 and CE T2 values) were measured in three areas: prostate cancer, PZ and TZ. We compared the values among the three areas and evaluated the differences between NE MRF and CE MRF values. RESULTS: ADC values and MRF-derived values were significantly higher in PZ than prostate cancer or TZ (p < 0.001). TZ had a significantly lower CE T1 but significantly higher values of the other variables than prostate cancer (p < 0.001). The T1 values in all three areas and the T2 values in prostate cancer and TZ were significantly lower on CE MRF than on NE MRF (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Quantitative analysis of NE and CE MRI can be conducted by using the MRF technique. The ADC value and the T1 and T2 values from CE MRF and NE MRF were found to be significantly different between prostate cancer and normal prostate tissue. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: The T1 and T2 values from contrast-enhanced MR fingerprinting are significantly different between prostate cancer and normal prostate tissue.
Authors: Julia Mai; Mohamed Abubrig; Thomas Lehmann; Tom Hilbert; Elisabeth Weiland; Marc O Grimm; Ulf Teichgräber; Tobias Franiel Journal: Invest Radiol Date: 2019-03 Impact factor: 6.016
Authors: Alice C Yu; Chaitra Badve; Lee E Ponsky; Shivani Pahwa; Sara Dastmalchian; Matthew Rogers; Yun Jiang; Seunghee Margevicius; Mark Schluchter; William Tabayoyong; Robert Abouassaly; Debra McGivney; Mark A Griswold; Vikas Gulani Journal: Radiology Date: 2017-02-10 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Francesco Giganti; Giulio Gambarota; Caroline M Moore; Nicola L Robertson; Neil McCartan; Charles Jameson; Simon R J Bott; Mathias Winkler; Brandon Whitcher; Ramiro Castro-Santamaria; Mark Emberton; Clare Allen; Alex Kirkham Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2017-11-14 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Yong Chen; Yun Jiang; Shivani Pahwa; Dan Ma; Lan Lu; Michael D Twieg; Katherine L Wright; Nicole Seiberlich; Mark A Griswold; Vikas Gulani Journal: Radiology Date: 2016-01-21 Impact factor: 11.105