Biparametric versus multiparametric MRI in the diagnosis of prostate cancer

被引:69
作者
Thestrup, Karen Cecilie Duus [1 ]
Logager, Vibeke [1 ]
Baslev, Ingerd [2 ]
Moller, Jakob M. [1 ]
Hansen, Rasmus Hvass [1 ]
Thomsen, Henrik S. [1 ]
机构
[1] Copenhagen Univ Hosp, Dept Radiol, Herlev Gentofte Hosp, DK-2730 Herlev, Denmark
[2] Copenhagen Univ Hosp, Dept Pathol, Herlev Gentofte Hosp, DK-2730 Herlev, Denmark
关键词
Prostate cancer; magnetic resonance imaging (MRI); multiparametric MRI; diffusion-weighted imaging; significant cancer;
D O I
10.1177/2058460116663046
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
Background: Since multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mp-MRI) of the prostate exceeds 30 min, minimizing the evaluation time of significant (Gleason scores > 6) prostate cancer (PCa) would be beneficial. A reduced protocol might be sufficient for the diagnosis. Purpose: To study whether a short unenhanced biparametric MRI (bp-MRI) matches mp-MRI in detecting significant PCa. Material and Methods: A total of 204 men (median age, 65 years; mean +/- SD, 64.1; range 45-75 years; median serum PSA level, 14 ng/mL; range, 2.2-120 ng/mL; median prostate volume, 60 mL; range, 23-263 mL) fulfilled the criteria for being enrolled. They underwent mp-MRI and prostate biopsy from January through June 2014. Of the included patients, 9.3% underwent prostatectomy, 90.7% had TRUS-bx, and 10.8 had MRI-targeted TRUS-bx. Two radiologists separately assessed the mp-MRI examination (T2-weighted [T2W] imaging, diffusion-weighted imaging [DWI], apparent diffusion coefficient map [ADC-map] and dynamic contrast-enhanced imaging [DCE]). Two months later, the bp-MRI version (T2W imaging, DWI, and ADC-map) was evaluated. Results: Reader 1: Assessing mp-MRI: 0 false negatives, sensitivity of 1, and specificity 0.04. Assessing bp-MRI: four false negatives, sensitivity of 0.94, and specificity 0.15. Reader 2: Assessing mp-MRI: five false negatives, sensitivity of 0.93, and specificity 0.16. Assessing bp-MRI: three false negatives, sensitivity of 0.96, and specificity 0.15. Intra-reader agreement Cohen's Kappa (kappa) was 0.87 for reader 1 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.83-0.92) and 0.84 for reader 2 (95% CI 0.78-0.89). Conclusion: Bp-MRI is as good as mp-MRI at detecting PCa. A large prospective study seems to be strongly warranted.
引用
收藏
页数:8
相关论文
共 18 条
  • [1] Synopsis of the PI-RADS v2 Guidelines for Multiparametric Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Recommendations for Use
    Barentsz, Jelle O.
    Weinreb, Jeffrey C.
    Verma, Sadhna
    Thoeny, Harriet C.
    Tempany, Clare M.
    Shtern, Faina
    Padhani, Anwar R.
    Margolis, Daniel
    Macura, Katarzyna J.
    Haider, Masoom A.
    Cornud, Francois
    Choyke, Peter L.
    [J]. EUROPEAN UROLOGY, 2016, 69 (01) : 41 - 49
  • [2] ESUR prostate MR guidelines 2012
    Barentsz, Jelle O.
    Richenberg, Jonathan
    Clements, Richard
    Choyke, Peter
    Verma, Sadhna
    Villeirs, Geert
    Rouviere, Olivier
    Logager, Vibeke
    Futterer, Jurgen J.
    [J]. EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY, 2012, 22 (04) : 746 - 757
  • [3] Characteristics of undetected prostate cancer on diffusion-weighted MR Imaging at 3-Tesla with a b-value of 2000 s/mm2: Imaging-pathologic correlation
    Barral, M.
    Cornud, F.
    Neuzillet, Y.
    Lonchampt, E.
    Lassalle, L.
    Delonchamp, N. B.
    Scherrer, A.
    [J]. DIAGNOSTIC AND INTERVENTIONAL IMAGING, 2015, 96 (09) : 923 - 929
  • [4] The 2005 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Gleason Grading of Prostatic Carcinoma
    Epstein, JI
    Allsbrook, WC
    Amin, MB
    Egevad, LL
    Bastacky, S
    Beltrán, AL
    Berner, A
    Billis, A
    Boccon-Gibod, L
    Cheng, L
    Civantos, F
    Cohen, C
    Cohen, MB
    Datta, M
    Davis, C
    Delahunt, B
    Delprado, W
    Eble, JN
    Foster, CS
    Furusato, M
    Gaudin, PB
    Grignon, DJ
    Humphrey, PA
    Iczkowski, KA
    Jones, EC
    Lucia, S
    McCue, PA
    Nazeer, T
    Oliva, E
    Pan, CC
    Pizov, G
    Reuter, V
    Samaratunga, H
    Sebo, T
    Sesterhenn, I
    Shevchuk, M
    Srigley, JR
    Suzigan, S
    Takahashi, H
    Tamboli, P
    Tan, PH
    Têtu, B
    Tickoo, S
    Tomaszewski, JE
    Troncoso, P
    Tsuzuki, T
    True, LD
    van der Kwast, T
    Wheeler, TM
    Wojno, KJ
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SURGICAL PATHOLOGY, 2005, 29 (09) : 1228 - 1242
  • [5] Can Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer Be Detected with Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging? A Systematic Review of the Literature
    Futterer, Jurgen J.
    Briganti, Alberto
    De Visschere, Pieter
    Emberton, Mark
    Giannarini, Gianluca
    Kirkham, Alex
    Taneja, Samir S.
    Thoeny, Harriet
    Villeirs, Geert
    Villers, Arnauld
    [J]. EUROPEAN UROLOGY, 2015, 68 (06) : 1045 - 1053
  • [6] Harvey CJ, 2012, BRIT J RADIOL, V85, P3, DOI [10.1259/bjr/56357549, DOI 10.1259/BJR/56357549]
  • [7] Multiparametric MRI of prostate cancer: An update on state-of-the-art techniques and their performance in detecting and localizing prostate cancer
    Hegde, John V.
    Mulkern, Robert V.
    Panych, Lawrence P.
    Fennessy, Fiona M.
    Fedorov, Andriy
    Maier, Stephan E.
    Tempany, Clare M. C.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING, 2013, 37 (05) : 1035 - 1054
  • [8] Mottet N, 2015, GUIDELINES PROSTATE
  • [9] Comparison of endorectal magnetic resonance imaging, guided prostate biopsy and digital rectal examination in the preoperative anatomical localization of prostate cancer
    Mullerad, M
    Hricak, H
    Kuroiwa, K
    Pucar, D
    Chen, HN
    Kattan, MW
    Scardino, PT
    [J]. JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2005, 174 (06) : 2158 - 2163
  • [10] What is the Most Effective Tool for Detecting Prostate Cancer using a Standard MR Scanner?
    Osugi, Kei
    Tanimoto, Akihiro
    Nakashima, Jun
    Shinoda, Kazunobu
    Hashiguchi, Akinori
    Oya, Mototsugu
    Jinzaki, Masahiro
    Kuribayashi, Sachio
    [J]. MAGNETIC RESONANCE IN MEDICAL SCIENCES, 2013, 12 (04) : 271 - 280