AJR Women's Imaging Online
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Platt, J.
Right arrow Articles by Schwab, R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Platt, J.
Right arrow Articles by Schwab, R.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
American Journal of Roentgenology, Vol 149, Issue 2, 315-318
Copyright © 1987 by American Roentgen Ray Society

Articles

The accuracy of CT in the staging of carcinoma of the prostate

JF Platt, RL Bree, and RE Schwab

Previous studies have reported the accuracy of CT in distinguishing stages of prostatic carcinoma, but they lack uniform surgical proof of histopathologic stage. We evaluated CT scans in 32 patients who underwent radical prostatectomy to assess its role in the preoperative staging of prostatic carcinoma. Two experienced radiologists blindly interpreted CT scans of the pelvis; they looked for evidence of tumor beyond the prostatic capsule and involvement of the seminal vesicles (stage C) or involvement of pelvic lymph nodes (stage D). Sixty-four interpretations in 32 patients yielded a specificity of 75% for predicting stages A or B disease (local disease), a sensitivity of 50% for the prediction of stages C or D, and an overall accuracy of staging of 67%. Interpretation errors were due to an inability to detect lymph node metastases, errors in evaluating the seminal vesicles, and errors in interpreting densities surrounding the prostate gland. Our data suggest that CT should not be used to influence decisions concerning surgical vs nonsurgical treatment in patients with clinically staged local disease and is only useful when unsuspected metastatic nodal disease is detected.
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 RadiologyHome page
H. Hricak, P. L. Choyke, S. C. Eberhardt, S. A. Leibel, and P. T. Scardino
Imaging Prostate Cancer: A Multidisciplinary Perspective
Radiology, April 1, 2007; 243(1): 28 - 53.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 JNMHome page
I. J. de Jong, J. Pruim, P. H. Elsinga, W. Vaalburg, and H. J. Mensink
Preoperative Staging of Pelvic Lymph Nodes in Prostate Cancer by 11C-Choline PET
J. Nucl. Med., March 1, 2003; 44(3): 331 - 335.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
F. V. Coakley, R. Y. Lin, L. H. Schwartz, and D. M. Panicek
Mesenteric Adenopathy in Patients with Prostate Cancer: Frequency and Etiology
Am. J. Roentgenol., January 1, 2002; 178(1): 125 - 127.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Cancer Res.Home page
T. R. DeGrado, R. E. Coleman, S. Wang, S. W. Baldwin, M. D. Orr, C. N. Robertson, T. J. Polascik, and D. T. Price
Synthesis and Evaluation of 18F-labeled Choline as an Oncologic Tracer for Positron Emission Tomography: Initial Findings in Prostate Cancer
Cancer Res., January 1, 2000; 61(1): 110 - 117.
[Abstract] [Full Text]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1987 by the American Roentgen Ray Society.