Literature DB >> 34635941

Magnetic resonance elastography of the prostate in patients with lower urinary tract symptoms: feasibility of the modified driver at high multi-frequencies.

Ying Deng1, Zhuoya Yi1, Tianhui Zhang1, Bing Hu1, Linqi Zhang1, Kritisha Rajlawot1, Sichi Kuang1, Bingjun He1, Arvin Arani2, Jun Chen2, Meng Yin2, Phillip Rossman2, Kevin J Glaser2, Sudhakar K Venkatesh2, Richard L Ehman2, Jin Wang3.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To demonstrate the feasibility and diagnostic value of high-frequency magnetic resonance elastography (MRE) for evaluation of prostatic disease in patients with lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS).
METHODS: 41 patients who underwent preoperative prostate MRI and MRE with a modified driver were enrolled retrospectively from May 2016 to September 2021. All were included in the assessment of MRE image quality, using a qualitative visual inspection and a quantitative confidence map. 35 patients (prostate cancer (PCa), n = 13; non-PCa, n = 22) undergoing prostatectomy or biopsy were evaluated for the diagnostic performance of stiffness values. The confidence values and the stiffness values were analyzed by one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and independent samples T test, respectively. Area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) analysis was performed.
RESULTS: Through the qualitative analysis, all MRE acquisitions were successful at 60, 90, 120 and 150 Hz. The quantitative confidence values were significantly lower at 60 Hz (0.683 ± 0.055) and 90 Hz (0.762 ± 0.048) than that at 120 Hz (0.814 ± 0.049) and 150 Hz (0.840 ± 0.049), all P < 0.001. The stiffness of PCa was higher than non-PCa at 90 Hz (P = 0.008), 120 Hz (P < 0.001) and 150 Hz (P < 0.001). The AUCs were 0.773, 0.881 and 0.944, respectively.
CONCLUSION: Prostate MRE using the modified driver is feasible at 60-150 Hz and image quality is better at higher frequencies. Prostate MRE may be useful and helpful to evaluate prostate diseases in patients with LUTS at higher frequencies; however, further study may be warranted with larger population in future.
© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Feasibility; High frequency; Magnetic resonance elastography; Prostate cancer

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34635941      PMCID: PMC9573768          DOI: 10.1007/s00261-021-03302-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Abdom Radiol (NY)


  32 in total

1.  Transurethral prostate magnetic resonance elastography: prospective imaging requirements.

Authors:  Arvin Arani; Donald Plewes; Rajiv Chopra
Journal:  Magn Reson Med       Date:  2010-09-29       Impact factor: 4.668

2.  A feasibility study of MR elastography in the diagnosis of prostate cancer at 3.0T.

Authors:  Saying Li; Min Chen; Wenchao Wang; Weifeng Zhao; Jianye Wang; Xuna Zhao; Cheng Zhou
Journal:  Acta Radiol       Date:  2011-04-01       Impact factor: 1.990

3.  NCCN Guidelines Insights: Prostate Cancer Early Detection, Version 2.2016.

Authors:  Peter R Carroll; J Kellogg Parsons; Gerald Andriole; Robert R Bahnson; Erik P Castle; William J Catalona; Douglas M Dahl; John W Davis; Jonathan I Epstein; Ruth B Etzioni; Thomas Farrington; George P Hemstreet; Mark H Kawachi; Simon Kim; Paul H Lange; Kevin R Loughlin; William Lowrance; Paul Maroni; James Mohler; Todd M Morgan; Kelvin A Moses; Robert B Nadler; Michael Poch; Chuck Scales; Terrence M Shaneyfelt; Marc C Smaldone; Geoffrey Sonn; Preston Sprenkle; Andrew J Vickers; Robert Wake; Dorothy A Shead; Deborah A Freedman-Cass
Journal:  J Natl Compr Canc Netw       Date:  2016-05       Impact factor: 11.908

4.  Measurement of tissue mechanical characteristics to distinguish between benign and malignant prostatic disease.

Authors:  S Phipps; T H J Yang; F K Habib; R L Reuben; S A McNeill
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2005-08       Impact factor: 2.649

5.  PI-RADS Prostate Imaging - Reporting and Data System: 2015, Version 2.

Authors:  Jeffrey C Weinreb; Jelle O Barentsz; Peter L Choyke; Francois Cornud; Masoom A Haider; Katarzyna J Macura; Daniel Margolis; Mitchell D Schnall; Faina Shtern; Clare M Tempany; Harriet C Thoeny; Sadna Verma
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2015-10-01       Impact factor: 20.096

Review 6.  Detection of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer Using Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Ultrasound Fusion Targeted Biopsy: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Massimo Valerio; Ian Donaldson; Mark Emberton; Behfar Ehdaie; Boris A Hadaschik; Leonard S Marks; Pierre Mozer; Ardeshir R Rastinehad; Hashim U Ahmed
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2014-11-01       Impact factor: 20.096

7.  Evaluation of MR elastography for prediction of lymph node metastasis in prostate cancer.

Authors:  Bing Hu; Ying Deng; Jingbiao Chen; Sichi Kuang; Wenjie Tang; Bingjun He; Linqi Zhang; Yuanqiang Xiao; Jun Chen; Phillip Rossman; Arvin Arani; Ziying Yin; Kevin J Glaser; Meng Yin; Sudhakar K Venkatesh; Richard L Ehman; Jin Wang
Journal:  Abdom Radiol (NY)       Date:  2021-03-02

Review 8.  Tumors: wounds that do not heal. Similarities between tumor stroma generation and wound healing.

Authors:  H F Dvorak
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1986-12-25       Impact factor: 91.245

Review 9.  The 2014 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Gleason Grading of Prostatic Carcinoma: Definition of Grading Patterns and Proposal for a New Grading System.

Authors:  Jonathan I Epstein; Lars Egevad; Mahul B Amin; Brett Delahunt; John R Srigley; Peter A Humphrey
Journal:  Am J Surg Pathol       Date:  2016-02       Impact factor: 6.394

Review 10.  Systematic review of complications of prostate biopsy.

Authors:  Stacy Loeb; Annelies Vellekoop; Hashim U Ahmed; James Catto; Mark Emberton; Robert Nam; Derek J Rosario; Vincenzo Scattoni; Yair Lotan
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2013-06-04       Impact factor: 20.096

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.