How to improve image quality of DWI of the prostate—enema or catheter preparation?

OBJECTIVES: To compare the impact of laxative enema preparation versus air/gas suction through a small catheter on image quality of prostate DWI. METHODS: In this single-center study, 200 consecutive patients (100 in each arm) with either enema or catheter preparation were retrospectively included. Two blinded readers independently assessed aspects of image quality on 5-point Likert scales. Scores were compared between groups and the influence of confounding factors evaluated using multivariable logistic regression. Prostate diameters were compared on DWI and T(2)-weighted imaging using intraclass correlation coefficients. RESULTS: Image quality was significantly higher in the enema group regarding the severity of susceptibility-related artifacts (reader 1: 0.34 ± 0.77 vs. 1.73 ± 1.34, reader 2: 0.38 ± 0.86 vs. 1.76 ± 1.39), the differentiability of the anatomy (reader 1: 3.36 ± 1.05 vs. 2.08 ± 1.31, reader 2: 3.37 ± 1.05 vs. 2.09 ± 1.35), and the overall image quality (reader 1: 3.66 ± 0.77 vs. 2.26 ± 1.33, Reader 2: 3.59 ± 0.87 vs. 2.23 ± 1.38) with almost perfect inter-observer agreement (κ = 0.92–0.95). In the enema group, rectal distention was significantly lower and strongly correlated with the severity of artifacts (reader 1: ρ = 0.79, reader 2: ρ = 0.73). Furthermore, there were significantly fewer substantial image distortions, with odds ratios of 0.051 and 0.084 for the two readers which coincided with a higher agreement of the prostate diameters in the phase-encoding direction (0.96 vs. 0.89). CONCLUSIONS: Enema preparation is superior to catheter preparation and yields substantial improvements in image quality. KEY POINTS: • Enema preparation is superior to decompression of the rectum using air/gas suction through a small catheter. • Enema preparation markedly improves the image quality of prostate DWI regarding the severity of susceptibility-related artifacts, the differentiability of the anatomy, and the overall image quality and considerably reduces substantial artifacts that may impair a reliable diagnosis.