Combined diffusion-weighted and dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI for prostate cancer diagnosis - Correlation with biopsy and histopathology

被引:244
作者
Kozlowski, Piotr
Chang, Silvia D.
Jones, Edward C.
Berean, Kenneth W.
Chen, Henry
Goldenberg, S. Larry
机构
[1] VGH, Prostate Ctr, Vancouver, BC V6H 3Z6, Canada
[2] Univ British Columbia, Dept Surg, Vancouver, BC V5Z 1M9, Canada
[3] Univ British Columbia, Dept Radiol, Vancouver, BC V5Z 1M9, Canada
[4] Univ British Columbia, Dept Pathol & Lab Med, Vancouver, BC V5Z 1M9, Canada
[5] Vancouver Gen Hosp, Dept Radiol, Vancouver, BC V5Z 1M9, Canada
[6] Univ British Columbia Hosp, Dept Pathol & Lab Med, Vancouver, BC, Canada
关键词
diffusion-weighted MRI; dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI; prostate cancer; endorectal coli; histopathology;
D O I
10.1002/jmri.20626
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 determine whether the combination of diffusion-weighted (DW) and dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) MRI provides higher diagnostic sensitivity for prostate cancer than each technique alone. Materials and Methods: Fourteen patients with a clinical suspicion of prostate cancer underwent endorectal MRI on a 1.5T scanner prior to transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)guided biopsies. The average values, of the apparent: diffusion coefficient (ADC, calculated from b-values of 0 and 600), K-trans, v(e), maximum gadolinium (Gd) concentration, onset time, mean,gradient, and maximum enhancement were determined. Correlation with histology was based, on biopsy (six patients) and prostatectomy specimen (eight, patients) results. The Tukey-Kramer test was used for statistical analysis. Results: The average values of all MRI parameters; except v, and maximum Gd concentration, showed significant differences between tumor and normal prostate. The sensitivity and specificity values were respectively 54% (35-72%) and 100% (95-100%) for the ADC data, and 59% (39-77%) and 74% (63-83%) for-the DCE data. When both ADC and DCE results were combined, the sensitivity increased to 87% (68-95%) and specificity decreased to 74% (62-83%). Conclusion: All but two DW-, and DCE-MRI parameters showed significant differences between tumor and normal prostate. Combining both techniques provides better sensitivity, with a small decrease in specificity.
引用
收藏
页码:108 / 113
页数:6
相关论文
共 40 条
[21]   Dynamic contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging in monitoring bone metastases in breast cancer patients receiving bisphosphonates and endocrine therapy [J].
Montemurro, F ;
Russo, F ;
Martincich, L ;
Cirillo, S ;
Gatti, M ;
Aglietta, M ;
Regge, D .
ACTA RADIOLOGICA, 2004, 45 (01) :71-74
[22]   Gleason grading of prostate cancer in needle biopsies or radical prostatectomy specimens: contemporary approach, current clinical significance and sources of pathology discrepancies [J].
Montironi, R ;
Mazzuccheli, R ;
Scarpelli, M ;
Lopez-Beltran, A ;
Fellegara, G ;
Algaba, F .
BJU INTERNATIONAL, 2005, 95 (08) :1146-1152
[23]   Differentiation of prostate cancer from benign prostate hypertrophy using dual-echo dynamic contrast MR imaging [J].
Muramoto, S ;
Uematsu, H ;
Kimura, H ;
Ishimori, Y ;
Sadato, N ;
Oyama, N ;
Matsuda, T ;
Kawamura, Y ;
Yonekura, Y ;
Okada, K ;
Itoh, H .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY, 2002, 44 (01) :52-58
[24]   Focal liver masses: Characterization with diffusion-weighted echo-planar MR imaging [J].
Namimoto, T ;
Yamashita, Y ;
Sumi, S ;
Tang, Y ;
Takahashi, M .
RADIOLOGY, 1997, 204 (03) :739-744
[25]   Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI in normal and abnormal prostate tissues as defined by biopsy, MRI, and 3D MRSI [J].
Noworolski, SM ;
Henry, RG ;
Vigneron, DB ;
Kurhanewicz, J .
MAGNETIC RESONANCE IN MEDICINE, 2005, 53 (02) :249-255
[26]  
NOWOROLSKI SM, 2003, P 11 ANN M ISMRM TOR
[27]   Dynamic contrast enhanced MRI of prostate cancer: Correlation with morphology and tumour stage, histological grade and PSA [J].
Padhani, AR ;
Gapinski, CJ ;
Macvicar, DA ;
Parker, GJ ;
Suckling, J ;
Revell, PB ;
Leach, MO ;
Dearnaley, DP ;
Husband, JE .
CLINICAL RADIOLOGY, 2000, 55 (02) :99-109
[28]   Effects of androgen deprivation on prostatic morphology and vascular permeability evaluated with MR imaging [J].
Padhani, AR ;
MacVicar, AD ;
Gapinski, CJ ;
Dearnaley, DP ;
Parker, GJM ;
Suckling, J ;
Leach, MO ;
Husband, JE .
RADIOLOGY, 2001, 218 (02) :365-374
[29]   Probing tumor microvascularity by measurement, analysis and display of contrast agent uptake kinetics [J].
Parker, GJM ;
Suckling, J ;
Tanner, SF ;
Padhani, AR ;
Revell, PB ;
Husband, JE ;
Leach, MO .
JMRI-JOURNAL OF MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING, 1997, 7 (03) :564-574
[30]   PROSTATE-CANCER - LOCAL STAGING WITH ENDORECTAL SURFACE COIL MR IMAGING [J].
SCHNALL, MD ;
IMAI, Y ;
TOMASZEWSKI, J ;
POLLACK, HM ;
LENKINSKI, RE ;
KRESSEL, HY .
RADIOLOGY, 1991, 178 (03) :797-802