Cargando…

Prostate Cancer: Added Value of Subtraction Dynamic Imaging in 3T Magnetic Resonance Imaging with a Phased-array Body Coil

PURPOSE: To determine the added value of dynamic subtraction magnetic resonance (MR) imaging for the localization of prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We examined 21 consecutive patients who underwent MR imaging in 3T unit with a phased-array body coil and then had radical prostatectomy. After...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Yu, Jeong-Sik, Chung, Jae-Joon, Hong, Soon Won, Chung, Byung Ha, Kim, Joo Hee, Kim, Ki Whang
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Yonsei University College of Medicine 2008
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2615366/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18972597
http://dx.doi.org/10.3349/ymj.2008.49.5.765
Descripción
Sumario:PURPOSE: To determine the added value of dynamic subtraction magnetic resonance (MR) imaging for the localization of prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We examined 21 consecutive patients who underwent MR imaging in 3T unit with a phased-array body coil and then had radical prostatectomy. After T2-weighted fast spin-echo imaging, we performed a contrast-enhanced dynamic 3D gradient-echo imaging consisting of pre-contrast, 2 successive early-phased (first imaging was started just after the appearance of contrast material in the aortic bifurcation followed by second imaging 35 seconds after the initiation of first imaging) and one 5-minute delayed post-contrast series. Subtraction of pre-contrast images from corresponding post-contrast images of each phase was performed on the console. RESULTS: On ROC analysis, the overall accuracy (A(z) value) of dynamic imaging combined with subtraction imaging was higher than T2-weighted imaging (p = 0.001) or conventional dynamic imaging alone (p = 0.074) for localization of cancer foci regardless of their zonal locations. Among pathologically verified 81 lesions, the mean volume of detected lesions with the subtraction images (n = 49, 0.69 cm(3)) was smaller than with T2-weighted images (n = 14, 1.05 cm(3)) or conventional dynamic images (n = 43, 0.71 cm(3)). CONCLUSION: For localization of small prostate cancer, additional subtraction for the dynamic imaging could be superior to both T2-weighted imaging and un-subtracted dynamic imaging.