HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Figures Only Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Wetter, A. Articles by Vogl, T. J. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Wetter, A. Articles by Vogl, T. J. Social Bookmarking                      What's this? Hotlight (NEW!) What's Hotlight?

Combined MRI and MR Spectroscopy of the Prostate Before Radical Prostatectomy

¹ Institute for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University of Frankfurt, Theodor-Stern-Kai 7, 60389 Frankurt, Germany.
² Department of Urology, University of Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany.
³ Department of Epileptology, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany.

OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to evaluate a routine protocol for combined MR and spectroscopic imaging of the prostate for staging accuracy.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS. Fifty patients with biopsy-proven prostate carcinoma were examined with our sequence protocol, which consisted of T2-weighted fast spin-echo sequences and a pelvic T1-weighted spin-echo sequence. For spectroscopy, we used a 3D chemical shift imaging (CSI) spin-echo sequence. Image interpretation was performed by two radiologists. The total number of tumor voxels and tumor voxels per slice were counted to estimate the tumor volume in every patient. The potential of MR spectroscopy to differentiate between T2 and T3 tumors, based on the estimated tumor volumes, was compared with the staging performance of MRI.

RESULTS. The MR measurement time was 19.01 minutes, and the total procedure time averaged 35 minutes. Seventy-six percent of the spectroscopic examinations were successful. Statistically significant differences in the number of tumor voxels per slice and tumor volumes were found between T2 and T3 tumors. The descriptive parameters of MRI and MR spectroscopy did not differ significantly; sensitivity and specificity were 75% and 87%, respectively, for MRI and 88% and 70%, respectively, for MR spectroscopy. The combination of both methods resulted in only a slight improvement in staging performance and was not statistically significant.

CONCLUSION. Combined MRI and MR spectroscopy of the prostate has no diagnostic advantage in staging performance over MRI alone. The mean tumor volumes, estimated by MR spectroscopy, differ statistically significantly between T2 and T3 tumors.

Keywords: genitourinary tract imaging • MRI • prostate

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				B. Turkbey, P. S. Albert, K. Kurdziel, and P. L. Choyke Imaging Localized Prostate Cancer: Current Approaches and New Developments Am. J. Roentgenol., June 1, 2009; 192(6): 1471 - 1480. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				V. Kundra, P. M. Silverman, S. F. Matin, and H. Choi Imaging in Oncology from The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center: Diagnosis, Staging, and Surveillance of Prostate Cancer Am. J. Roentgenol., October 1, 2007; 189(4): 830 - 844. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. Kawashima and B. F. King Jr Invited Commentary RadioGraphics, January 1, 2007; 27(1): 75 - 77. [Full Text] [PDF]