Cargando…

Sub-differentiation of PI-RADS 3 lesions in TZ by advanced diffusion-weighted imaging to aid the biopsy decision process

BACKGROUND: Performing biopsy for intermediate lesions with PI-RADS 3 has always been controversial. Moreover, it is difficult to differentiate prostate cancer (PCa) and benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) nodules in PI-RADS 3 lesions by conventional scans, especially for transition zone (TZ) lesions...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Zhou, Kun-Peng, Huang, Hua-Bin, Bu, Chao, Luo, Zhong-Xing, Huang, Wen-Sheng, Xie, Li-Zhi, Liu, Qing-Yu, Bian, Jie
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9950630/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36845749
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2023.1092073
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: Performing biopsy for intermediate lesions with PI-RADS 3 has always been controversial. Moreover, it is difficult to differentiate prostate cancer (PCa) and benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) nodules in PI-RADS 3 lesions by conventional scans, especially for transition zone (TZ) lesions. The purpose of this study is sub-differentiation of transition zone (TZ) PI-RADS 3 lesions using intravoxel incoherent motion (IVIM), stretched exponential model, and diffusion kurtosis imaging (DKI) to aid the biopsy decision process. METHODS: A total of 198 TZ PI-RADS 3 lesions were included. 149 lesions were BPH, while 49 lesions were PCa, including 37 non-clinical significant PCa (non-csPCa) lesions and 12 clinical significant PCa (csPCa) lesions. Binary logistic regression analysis was used to examine which parameters could predict PCa in TZ PI-RADS 3 lesions. The ROC curve was used to test diagnostic efficiency in distinguishing PCa from TZ PI-RADS 3 lesions, while one-way ANOVA analysis was used to examine which parameters were statistically significant among BPH, non-csPCa and csPCa. RESULTS: The logistic model was statistically significant (χ2 = 181.410, p<0.001) and could correctly classify 89.39% of the subjects. Parameters of fractional anisotropy (FA) (p=0.004), mean diffusion (MD) (p=0.005), mean kurtosis (MK) (p=0.015), diffusion coefficient (D) (p=0.001), and distribute diffusion coefficient (DDC) (p=0.038) were statistically significant in the model. ROC analysis showed that AUC was 0.9197 (CI 95%: 0.8736-0.9659). Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value were 92.1%, 80.4%, 93.9% and 75.5%, respectively. FA and MK of csPCa were higher than those of non-csPCa (all p<0.05), while MD, ADC, D, and DDC of csPCa were lower than those of non-csPCa (all p<0.05). CONCLUSION: FA, MD, MK, D, and DDC can predict PCa in TZ PI-RADS 3 lesions and inform the decision-making process of whether or not to perform a biopsy. Moreover, FA, MD, MK, D, DDC, and ADC may have ability to identify csPCa and non-csPCa in TZ PI-RADS 3 lesions.