Localising Prostate Cancer: Comparison of Endorectal Magnetic Resonance (MR) Imaging and 3D-MR Spectroscopic Imaging with Transrectal Ultrasound-Guided Biopsy

被引:9
|
作者
Gbenou, Maximilien C. Goris [1 ,5 ]
Peltier, Alexandre [1 ]
Addla, Sanjai K. [4 ]
Lemort, Marc [2 ]
Bollens, Renaud [4 ]
Larsimont, Denis [3 ]
Roumeguere, Thierry [4 ]
Schulman, Claude C. [4 ]
van Velthoven, Roland [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Libre Bruxelles, Inst Jules Bordet, Dept Urol, BE-1000 Brussels, Belgium
[2] Inst Jules Bordet, Dept Radiol, B-1000 Brussels, Belgium
[3] Inst Jules Bordet, Dept Histopathol, B-1000 Brussels, Belgium
[4] Free Univ Brussels, Erasme Hosp, Dept Urol, B-1050 Brussels, Belgium
[5] Ctr Hosp Valence, Dept Urol, Valence, France
关键词
Prostate cancer; Prostate weight; Magnetic resonance imaging; Magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging; Transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy; Tumour localisation; RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY; LOCALIZATION;
D O I
10.1159/000331909
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
Background: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and MR spectroscopic imaging (MRSI) have been gaining acceptance as tools in the evaluation of prostate cancer. We compared the accuracy of transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided biopsy and dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI combined with three-dimensional (3D) MRSI in locating prostate tumours and determined the influence of prostate weight on MRI accuracy. Patients and Methods: Between March 1999 and October 2006, 507 patients with localised prostate cancer underwent radical prostatectomy (RP) at the Jules Bordet Institute. Of these, 220 had undergone endorectal MRI (1.5 T Siemens Quantum Symphony) and 3D-MRSI prior to RP. We retrospectively reviewed data on tumour location and compared the results obtained by MRI and by TRUS-guided biopsy with those obtained on histopathology of the RP specimen. Results: Patient data were as follows: median age 62.4 years (45-74); median PSA 6.36 ng/ml (0.5-22.6); 73.6% of patients had non-palpable disease (Tic); median biopsy Gleason score 6 (3-9); median RP specimen weight 50 g (12-172); median pathological Gleason score 7 (4-10); 68.64% of patients had organ-confined (pT2) disease. Tumour localisation was correlated with RP data in a significantly higher percentage of patients when using MRI rather than TRUS-guided biopsy (47.4 vs. 36.6%, p < 0.0001). MRI was marginally superior to TRUS-guided biopsy in detecting malignancy at the prostate apex (48.3 vs. 41.9%, p = 0.0687) and somewhat better at the prostate base (46 vs. 39.1%, p = 0.0413). It was highly significantly better at mid-gland (52 vs. 41.1%, p = 0.0015) and in the transition zone (40.1 vs. 24.3%, p < 0.0001). MRI had higher sensitivity in larger (>= 50 g) than smaller (<50 g) prostates (50.3 vs. 42.2%, p = 0.0017). Conclusions: MRI was superior to TRUS-guided biopsy in locating prostate tumours except at the gland apex. MRI was more accurate in larger (>= 50 g) than smaller prostates. Copyright (C) 2011 S. Karger AG, Basel
引用
收藏
页码:12 / 17
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] A comparison of prostate tumor targeting strategies using magnetic resonance imaging-targeted, transrectal ultrasound-guided fusion biopsy
    Martin, Peter R.
    Cool, Derek W.
    Fenster, Aaron
    Ward, Aaron D.
    [J]. MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2018, 45 (03) : 1018 - 1028
  • [22] Re: Magnetic Resonance Imaging/Ultrasound Fusion Guided Prostate Biopsy Improves Cancer Detection Following Transrectal Ultrasound Biopsy and Correlates With Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging
    Robertson, Nicola L.
    Moore, Caroline M.
    Emberton, Mark
    [J]. JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2012, 187 (04): : 1511 - 1512
  • [23] Endorectal MR and MR spectroscopic imaging of prostate cancer: Histopathological determinants of tumor visibility
    Hom, JJ
    Coakley, FV
    Simko, JP
    Qayyum, A
    Carroll, P
    Kurhanewicz, J
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 2005, 184 (04) : 62 - 62
  • [24] Re: Comparison of MR/Ultrasound Fusion-guided Biopsy with Ultrasound-guided Biopsy for the Diagnosis of Prostate Cancer
    Gershman, Boris
    Karnes, R. Jeffrey
    [J]. EUROPEAN UROLOGY, 2015, 68 (03) : 536 - 537
  • [25] Re: Comparison of MR/Ultrasound Fusion-Guided Biopsy With Ultrasound-guided Biopsy for the Diagnosis of Prostate Cancer
    Walz, Jochen
    [J]. EUROPEAN UROLOGY, 2016, 69 (04) : 756 - 757
  • [26] Predicting prostate cancer with dynamic endorectal coil MR and proton spectroscopic MR imaging
    Portalez, D
    Malavaud, B
    Herigault, G
    Lhez, JM
    Elman, B
    Jonca, F
    Besse, J
    Pradere, M
    [J]. JOURNAL DE RADIOLOGIE, 2004, 85 (12): : 1999 - 2004
  • [27] Transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy versus combined magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion and systematic biopsy for prostate cancer detection in routine clinical practice
    Bae, Jae Heung
    Kim, See Hyung
    [J]. ULTRASONOGRAPHY, 2020, 39 (02) : 137 - 143
  • [28] MAGNETIC RESONANCE SPECTROSCOPIC IMAGING 3T AND PROSTATE CANCER: CORRELATION WITH TRANSPERINEAL ULTRASOUND GUIDED PROSTATE BIOPSY
    Castellucci, Roberto
    Altieri, Vincenzo Maria
    Marchioni, Michele
    Castellan, Pietro
    Pellegrini, Maurizio
    Alvarez-Maestro, Mario
    Sanchez-Gomez, Javier
    De Francesco, Piergustavo
    Ingrosso, Manuela
    Tartaro, Armando
    Tenaglia, Raffaele Lanfranca
    [J]. ARCHIVOS ESPANOLES DE UROLOGIA, 2015, 68 (05): : 493 - 501
  • [29] Endorectal MRI and MR spectroscopic imaging of prostate cancer: Developing selection criteria for MR-guided focal therapy
    Chang, Stephanie T.
    Westphalen, Antonio C.
    Jha, Priyanka
    Jung, Adam J.
    Carroll, Peter R.
    Kurhanewicz, John
    Coakley, Fergus V.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING, 2014, 39 (03) : 519 - 525
  • [30] Prostate cancer localization with endorectal MR imaging and MR spectroscopic imaging: Effect of clinical data on reader accuracy
    Dhingsa, R
    Qayyum, A
    Coakley, FV
    Lu, Y
    Jones, KD
    Swanson, MG
    Carroll, PR
    Hricak, H
    Kurhanewicz, J
    [J]. RADIOLOGY, 2004, 230 (01) : 215 - 220