Imaging prostate cancer

被引:161
作者
Yu, KK
Hricak, H
机构
[1] Mem Sloan Kettering Canc Ctr, Dept Radiol, New York, NY 10021 USA
[2] Univ Calif San Francisco, Dept Radiol, San Francisco, CA 94143 USA
关键词
D O I
10.1016/S0033-8389(05)70150-0
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
In the detection of prostate cancer the most important role of imaging is ultrasound-guided prostatic biopsy. In the staging evaluation of prostate cancer, each presently used modality-transrectal US (TRUS) imaging, CT, nuclear medicine, and positron emission tomography-has advantages and disadvantages. Evidence-based guidelines on the use of CT and nuclear medicine bone scan, in assessing the risk of distant spread of prostate cancer, are available. There is no consensus and there are no guidelines, however, for the use of imaging in the evaluation of prostate cancer local tumor extent. Results on the value of TRUS vary widely, and prospective multicenter studies suggest that TRUS is no better than digital rectal examination in predicting extracapsular extension. MR imaging offers the most promise for local staging of prostate cancer, but it must resolve problems of reproducible image quality and interobserver variability, and it should prove its efficacy in multicenter trials before it can be recommended for general clinical use. The introduction of MR spectroscopic imaging further expands the value of MX imaging, offering anatomic and metabolic evaluation of prostate cancer.
引用
收藏
页码:59 / +
页数:28
相关论文
共 94 条
[1]   Competing risk analysis of men aged 55 to 74 years at diagnosis managed conservatively for clinically localized prostate cancer [J].
Albertsen, PC ;
Hanley, JA ;
Gleason, DF ;
Barry, MJ .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 1998, 280 (11) :975-980
[2]  
ALLEPUZ LCA, 1995, J UROLOGY, V154, P1407
[3]  
AUS G, 1994, SCAND J UROL NEPHROL, P1
[4]  
Bartolozzi C, 1996, EUR RADIOL, V6, P339
[5]   A comparison of endorectal magnetic resonance imaging and transrectal ultrasonography in the local staging of prostate cancer with histopathological correlation [J].
Bates, TS ;
Gillatt, DA ;
Cavanagh, PM ;
Speakman, M .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 1997, 79 (06) :927-932
[6]   A CRITIQUE OF THE DECISION-ANALYSIS FOR CLINICALLY LOCALIZED PROSTATE-CANCER [J].
BECK, JR ;
KATTAN, MW ;
MILES, BJ .
JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 1994, 152 (05) :1894-1899
[7]   OPTIMIZATION OF PROSTATE CARCINOMA STAGING - COMPARISON OF IMAGING AND CLINICAL METHODS [J].
BONI, RAH ;
BONER, JA ;
DEBATIN, JF ;
TRINKLER, F ;
KNONAGEL, H ;
VONHOCHSTETTER, A ;
HELFENSTEIN, U ;
KRESTIN, GP .
CLINICAL RADIOLOGY, 1995, 50 (09) :593-600
[8]   CONTRAST-ENHANCED ENDORECTAL COIL MRI IN LOCAL STAGING OF PROSTATE CARCINOMA [J].
BONI, RAH ;
BONER, JA ;
LUTOLF, UM ;
TRINKLER, F ;
PESTALOZZI, DM ;
KRESTIN, GP .
JOURNAL OF COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY, 1995, 19 (02) :232-237
[9]   The role of color Doppler and staging biopsies in prostate cancer detection [J].
Bree, RL .
UROLOGY, 1997, 49 (3A) :31-34
[10]   NERVE-SPARING RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY - EVALUATION OF RESULTS AFTER 250 PATIENTS [J].
CATALONA, WJ ;
BIGG, SW .
JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 1990, 143 (03) :538-544