STAGING OF PROSTATE-CANCER - RESULTS OF RADIOLOGY DIAGNOSTIC ONCOLOGY GROUP PROJECT COMPARISON OF 3 MR-IMAGING TECHNIQUES

被引:185
作者
TEMPANY, CM
ZHOU, X
ZERHOUNI, EA
RIFKIN, MD
QUINT, LE
PICCOLI, CW
ELLIS, JH
MCNEIL, BJ
机构
[1] JOHNS HOPKINS MED INST,RUSSELL H MORGAN DEPT RADIOL & RADIOL SCI,BALTIMORE,MD 21205
[2] HARVARD UNIV,SCH MED,DEPT HLTH CARE POLICY,BOSTON,MA 02115
[3] THOMAS JEFFERSON UNIV HOSP,DEPT RADIOL,PHILADELPHIA,PA
[4] UNIV MICHIGAN,DEPT RADIOL,ANN ARBOR,MI 48109
关键词
DIAGNOSTIC RADIOLOGY; OBSERVER PERFORMANCE; PROSTATE; MR; NEOPLASMS;
D O I
10.1148/radiology.192.1.8208963
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
PURPOSE: To assess accuracy of three different magnetic resonance (MR) imaging techniques, including the endorectal coil, in staging prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: MR imaging was performed in 213 patients with prostate cancer with a conventional body coil, with fat suppression and a body coil, and with an endorectal coil. Radiologists identified tumor invasion into periprostatic tissues, neurovascular bundles, and seminal vesicles. Each technique was evaluated separately, and in a subset of 74 patients the three techniques were evaluated together. Images obtained with the two body-coil techniques were read in combination with images obtained with the endorectal coil (combination A) and alone (combination B). RESULTS: Overall accuracy for conventional body-coil, fat-suppressed body-coil, and endorectal-coil MR was 61%, 64%, and 54%, respectively. Overall group accuracy for combinations A and B was 57% and 61%. Considerable interreader variability was found for combination A. CONCLUSION: No technique was highly accurate for staging early prostate cancer. Individual radiologists did achieve a high degree of staging accuracy with the endorectal-coil and body-coil combination.
引用
收藏
页码:47 / 54
页数:8
相关论文
共 23 条