Role of endorectal coil magnetic resonance imaging in treatment of patients with prostate cancer and in determining radical prostatectomy surgical margin status: Report of a single surgeon's practice

被引:18
作者
Zhang, Jian Qing
Loughlin, Kevin R.
Zou, Kelly H.
Haker, Steven
Tempany, Clare M. C.
机构
[1] Brigham & Womens Hosp, Dept Radiol, Surg Planning Lab, Boston, MA 02115 USA
[2] Brigham & Womens Hosp, Div Urol Surg, Boston, MA 02115 USA
[3] Dana Farber Canc Inst, Boston, MA 02115 USA
[4] Harvard Univ, Sch Med, Dept Hlth Care Policy, Boston, MA 02115 USA
关键词
D O I
10.1016/j.urology.2007.01.094
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
Objectives To evaluate the role of the combination of endorectal coil and external multicoil array magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in the management of prostate cancer and predicting the surgical margin status in a single-surgeon practice. Methods We reviewed all patients referred by a single Surgeon from January 1993 to May 2002 for staging prostate MRI before selecting treatment. All MRI examinations were performed using 1.5T (Signa, GE Medical Systems) with a combination of endorectal and pelvic multicoil array. The tumor size, stage, and total gland volume on MRI, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level, and Gleason score were all compared with the pathologic stage and diagnosis of positive surgical margins (PSMs). Results A total of 232 patients were evaluated, of whom 110 underwent radical prostatectomy, all performed by one surgeon (group 1), and 122 did not (group 2). The results showed that MRI stage, PSA level, and age were all significantly different (P <0.001). In group 1, the results showed a high specificity (99%) and accuracy (91%) for MRI staging of T3 cancer. The postoperative follow-up (median 4.5 years) revealed that 90% of men had PSA levels of less than '0.1 ng/mL. The PSM rate was 16%. No significant difference was found on MRI between the PSM group and non-PSM group. A single tumor length greater than 1.8 cm was the cutpoint above which PSMs were found (P = 0.002). Conclusions The results of our study have shown that the corribined use of clinical data and endorectal MRI can help optimize patient treatment and selection for surgery and, in a single surgeon's practice, lead to successful outcomes.
引用
收藏
页码:1134 / 1137
页数:4
相关论文
共 10 条
[1]   Predicting extracapsular extension of prostate cancer in men treated with radical prostatectomy: Results from the population based prostate cancer outcomes study [J].
Gilliland, FD ;
Hoffman, RM ;
Hamilton, A ;
Albertsen, P ;
Eley, JW ;
Harlan, L ;
Stanford, JL ;
Hunt, WC ;
Potosky, A .
JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 1999, 162 (04) :1341-1345
[2]   CARCINOMA OF THE PROSTATE-GLAND - MR-IMAGING WITH PELVIC PHASED-ARRAY COILS VERSUS INTEGRATED ENDORECTAL PELVIC PHASED-ARRAY COILS [J].
HRICAK, H ;
WHITE, S ;
VIGNERON, D ;
KURHANEWICZ, J ;
KOSCO, A ;
LEVIN, D ;
WEISS, J ;
NARAYAN, P ;
CARROLL, PR .
RADIOLOGY, 1994, 193 (03) :703-709
[3]  
Langlotz C P, 1996, Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am, V4, P533
[4]  
Loughlin K R, 1996, Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am, V4, P449
[5]   Use sf endorectal MR imaging to predict prostate carcinoma recurrence after radical prostatectomy [J].
Manzone, TA ;
Malkowicz, SB ;
Tomaszewski, JE ;
Schnall, MD ;
Langlotz, CP .
RADIOLOGY, 1998, 209 (02) :537-542
[6]   MR-IMAGING OF PROSTATE-CANCER WITH AN ENDORECTAL SURFACE COIL TECHNIQUE - CORRELATION WITH WHOLE-MOUNT SPECIMENS [J].
QUINN, SF ;
FRANZINI, DA ;
DEMLOW, TA ;
ROSENCRANTZ, DR ;
KIM, JH ;
HANNA, RM ;
SZUMOWSKI, J .
RADIOLOGY, 1994, 190 (02) :323-327
[7]  
SONNAD SS, 1996, MAGN RESON IMAGING C, V4, P533
[8]   Biological determinants of cancer progression in men with prostate cancer [J].
Stamey, TA ;
McNeal, JE ;
Yemoto, CM ;
Sigal, BM ;
Johnstone, IM .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 1999, 281 (15) :1395-1400
[9]  
Tempany C M, 1996, Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am, V4, P519
[10]   Incidence, etiology, location, prevention and treatment of positive surgical margins after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer [J].
Wieder, JA ;
Soloway, MS .
JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 1998, 160 (02) :299-315