Does endorectal coil MRI increase the accuracy of preoperative prostate cancer staging?

被引:0
作者
Pooli, Aydin [1 ]
Isharwal, Sudhir [2 ]
Cook, Gates [3 ]
Oliveto, Jennifer M. [4 ]
LaGrange, Chad A. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Nebraska Med Ctr, Div Urol, Omaha, NE USA
[2] Glickman Urol & Kidney Inst, Dept Urol, Cleveland, OH USA
[3] Univ Oklahoma, Hlth Sci Ctr, Dept Urol, Oklahoma City, OK USA
[4] Univ Nebraska Med Ctr, Dept Radiol, Omaha, NE USA
关键词
cancer staging; endorectal coil; MRI; prostate cancer; prostatectomy; IMAGE QUALITY; 3; T; PERFORMANCE; ARRAY;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
R5 [内科学]; R69 [泌尿科学(泌尿生殖系疾病)];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Introduction: We sought to investigate the association of preprostatectomy magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and surgical pathologic findings in patients with prostate cancer. Materials and methods: All patients with prostate cancer and preprostatectomy MRI available between 2002 and 2015 were included. Age, prostate-specific antigen at diagnosis, Gleason score at biopsy, MRI technique, radiology report suggestive of prostate cancer, extraprostatic invasion and seminal vesicle involvement, lymphadenopathy and final pathology report were retrospectively reviewed. Data was analyzed for sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values of MRI findings for predicting T3 disease. Consistency of MRI findings with pathology report was compared between MRIs with or without endorectal coil (ERC). Results: A cohort of 83 patients was identified. Eighty-seven percent of the patients had MRI findings suggestive of prostate cancer. MRI was performed with and without ERC in 21 (25.3%) and 62 (74.3%) patients respectively. Eighty-five percent of patients with ERC and 88.7% of those without ERC had MRI findings suggestive of prostate cancer (p = 0.659). MRI correlated with final surgical pathology stage T3 in 53 patients (64%). MRI findings were consistent with final pathology report in 70% of ERC group and 61.3% of non ERC group (p = 0.482). In terms of extra prostatic invasion or seminal vesicle involvement, MRI had specificity, sensitivity, positive and negative predictive values of 84.44%, 37.84%, 66.67% and 62.3% respectively. Conclusions: MRI was specific but not sensitive in determining extraprostatic or seminal vesicle invasion. MRI was not accurate for lymph node involvement. In addition, using an ERC did not increase the accuracy of prostate MRI in this small cohort.
引用
收藏
页码:8564 / 8567
页数:4
相关论文
共 13 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] MRI of prostate cancer at 1.5 and 3.0 T:: Comparison of image quality in tumor detection and staging
    Beyersdorff, D
    Taymoorian, K
    Knösel, T
    Schnorr, D
    Felix, R
    Hamm, B
    Bruhn, H
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 2005, 185 (05) : 1214 - 1220
  • [3] Endorectal magnetic resonance imaging has limited clinical ability to preoperatively predict pT3 prostate cancer
    Brajtbord, Jonathan S.
    Lavery, Hugh J.
    Nabizada-Pace, Fatima
    Senaratne, Prathibha
    Samadi, David B.
    [J]. BJU INTERNATIONAL, 2011, 107 (09) : 1419 - 1424
  • [4] Accuracy of Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Local Staging of Prostate Cancer: A Diagnostic Meta-analysis
    de Rooij, Maarten
    Hamoen, Esther H. J.
    Witjes, J. Alfred
    Barentsz, Jelle O.
    Rovers, Maroeska M.
    [J]. EUROPEAN UROLOGY, 2016, 70 (02) : 233 - 245
  • [5] 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
  • [6] Prostate cancer:: Body-array versus endorectal coil MR imaging at 3 T -: Comparison of image quality, localization, and staging performance
    Heijmink, Stijn W. T. P. J.
    Futterer, Jurgen J.
    Hambrock, Thomas
    Takahashi, Satoru
    Scheenen, Tom W. J.
    Huisman, Henkjan J.
    Hulsbergen-Van de Kaa, Christina A.
    Knipscheer, Ben C.
    Kiemeney, Lambertus A. L. M.
    Witjes, J. Alfred
    Barentsz, Jelle O.
    [J]. RADIOLOGY, 2007, 244 (01) : 184 - 195
  • [7] Cost-effectiveness of endorectal magnetic resonance imaging for the staging of prostate cancer
    Langlotz, CP
    Schnall, MD
    Malkowicz, SB
    Schwartz, JS
    [J]. ACADEMIC RADIOLOGY, 1996, 3 : S24 - S27
  • [8] INFLATABLE SURFACE COIL FOR MR IMAGING OF THE PROSTATE
    MARTIN, JF
    HAJEK, P
    BAKER, L
    GYLYSMORIN, V
    FITZMORRISGLASS, R
    MATTREY, RR
    [J]. RADIOLOGY, 1988, 167 (01) : 268 - 270
  • [9] The role of endorectal coil MRI in preoperative staging and decision-making for the treatment of clinically localized prostate cancer
    Masterson, Timothy A.
    Touijer, Karim
    [J]. MAGNETIC RESONANCE MATERIALS IN PHYSICS BIOLOGY AND MEDICINE, 2008, 21 (06) : 371 - 377
  • [10] Comparison of Comfort and Image Quality With Two Endorectal Coils in MRI of the Prostate
    Powell, Daniel K.
    Kodsi, Karen L.
    Levin, Galina
    Yim, Angela
    Nicholson, Duane
    Kagen, Alexander C.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING, 2014, 39 (02) : 419 - 426