Intravoxel incoherent motion predicts positive surgical margins and Gleason score upgrading after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer

被引:2
|
作者
Meng, Shuang [1 ]
Gan, Wanting [1 ]
Chen, Lihua [1 ]
Wang, Nan [1 ]
Liu, Ailian [1 ]
机构
[1] Dalian Med Univ, Dept Radiol, Affiliated Hosp 1, 222 Zhongshan Rd, Dalian 116011, Peoples R China
来源
RADIOLOGIA MEDICA | 2023年 / 128卷 / 06期
关键词
Prostate cancer; Positive surgical margins; Gleason score upgrading; MRI; APPARENT DIFFUSION-COEFFICIENT; BIOCHEMICAL RECURRENCE; ACTIVE SURVEILLANCE; BIOPSY; PATHOLOGY; TISSUE; SERIES; RISK;
D O I
10.1007/s11547-023-01645-2
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
BackgroundWhether Intravoxel incoherent motion (IVIM) can be used as a predictive tool of positive surgical margins (PSMs) and Gleason score (GS) upgrading in prostate cancer (PCa) patients after radical prostatectomy (RP) still remains unclear. The aim of this study is to explore the ability of IVIM and clinical characteristics to predict PSMs and GS upgrading.MethodsA total of 106 PCa patients after RP who underwent pelvic mpMRI (multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging) between January 2016 and December 2021 and met the requirements were retrospectively included in our study. IVIM parameters were obtained using GE Functool post-processing software. Logistic regression models were fitted to confirm the predictive risk factor of PSMs and GS upgrading. The area under the curve and fourfold contingency table were used to evaluate the diagnostic efficacy of IVIM and clinical parameters.ResultsMultivariate logistic regression analyses revealed that percent of positive cores, apparent diffusion coefficient and molecular diffusion coefficient (D) were independent predictors of PSMs (Odds Ratio (OR) were 6.07, 3.62 and 3.16, respectively), Biopsy GS and pseudodiffusion coefficient (D*) were independent predictors of GS upgrading (OR were 0.563 and 7.15, respectively). The fourfold contingency table suggested that combined diagnosis increased the ability of predicting PSMs but had no advantage in predicting GS upgrading except the sensitivity from 57.14 to 91.43%.ConclusionsIVIM showed good performance in predicting PSMs and GS upgrading. Combining IVIM and clinical factors enhanced the performance of predicting PSMs, which may contribute to clinical diagnosis and treatment.
引用
收藏
页码:668 / 678
页数:11
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] POSITIVE SURGICAL MARGINS AT RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY: NATIONAL AVERAGES WITHIN PSA AND GLEASON STRATA
    Salazar, Marco
    Chatterjee, Suman
    Lin, Daniel
    Wright, Jonathan
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2011, 185 (04): : E65 - E65
  • [42] Analysis of risk factors for Gleason score upgrading after radical prostatectomy in a Chinese cohort
    Zhang, Baoling
    Wu, Shangrong
    Zhang, Yang
    Guo, Mingyu
    Liu, Ranlu
    CANCER MEDICINE, 2021, 10 (21): : 7772 - 7780
  • [43] Prediction model of gleason score upgrading after radical prostatectomy based on a bayesian network
    Guipeng Wang
    Xinning Wang
    Haotian Du
    Yaozhong Wang
    Liguo Sun
    Mingxin Zhang
    Shengxian Li
    Yuefeng Jia
    Xuecheng Yang
    BMC Urology, 23
  • [44] Prediction model of gleason score upgrading after radical prostatectomy based on a bayesian network
    Wang, Guipeng
    Wang, Xinning
    Du, Haotian
    Wang, Yaozhong
    Sun, Liguo
    Zhang, Mingxin
    Li, Shengxian
    Jia, Yuefeng
    Yang, Xuecheng
    BMC UROLOGY, 2023, 23 (01)
  • [45] Prostate Volume is A Predictor of Gleason Score Upgrading after Radical Prostatectomy in Low-Risk Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
    Zou, Qianming
    Cao, Jiadong
    Chen, Zhiqiang
    Wang, Shusheng
    Gu, Chiming
    Li, Siyi
    Xiang, Songtao
    UROLOGY JOURNAL, 2024, 21 (01) : 20 - 28
  • [46] Predictors of positive surgical margins after radical perineal prostatectomy
    Goetzl, Manlio A.
    Krebill, Ron
    Griebling, Tomas L.
    Thrasher, J. Brantley
    CANADIAN JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2009, 16 (02) : 4553 - 4557
  • [47] Positive Surgical Margins After Radical Prostatectomy: Does It Matter?
    Preston, Mark A.
    Blute, Michael L.
    EUROPEAN UROLOGY, 2014, 65 (02) : 314 - 315
  • [48] EXTERNAL VALIDATION OF THE QUANTITATIVE GLEASON SCORE IN PREDICTING PROSTATE CANCER RECURRENCE AFTER RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY
    Reese, Adam
    Woldemichael, Elen
    Cooperberg, Matthew
    Nelson, Joel
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2014, 191 (04): : E602 - E602
  • [49] DEVELOPMENT AND INTERNAL VALIDATION OF A NOMOGRAM PREDICTING THE PROBABILITY OF PROSTATE CANCER GLEASON SCORE UPGRADING BETWEEN BIOPSY AND RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY
    Klatte, T.
    Waldert, M.
    El-Fadel, A.
    Weibl, P.
    De Martino, M.
    Remzi, M.
    Marberger, M.
    EUROPEAN UROLOGY SUPPLEMENTS, 2010, 9 (06) : 656 - 656
  • [50] Detecting lower in addition to the highest Gleason score prostate cancer on core biopsy and the odds of upgrading at radical prostatectomy.
    Phillips, John G.
    Aizer, Ayal A.
    Chen, Ming-Hui
    Hirsch, Michelle S.
    Richie, Jerome P.
    Tempany, Clare M.
    Hegde, John
    Loffredo, Marian
    D'Amico, Anthony Victor
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2013, 31 (15)