Interscanner Comparison of Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced MRI in Prostate Cancer: 1.5 Versus 3 T MRI

PURPOSEThe aim of the study was the comparison of the diagnostic potential of dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging to differentiate between prostate carcinoma and normal prostate tissue as well as prostatitis at 2 different field strengths1.5 versus 3 T. METHODSSixty-six patients wit...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Investigative radiology 2013-02, Vol.48 (2), p.92-97
Hauptverfasser: Sertdemir, Metin, Schoenberg, Stefan O, Sourbron, Steven, Hausmann, Daniel, Heinzelbecker, Julia, Michaely, Henrik J, Dinter, Dietmar J, Weidner, Anja M
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:PURPOSEThe aim of the study was the comparison of the diagnostic potential of dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging to differentiate between prostate carcinoma and normal prostate tissue as well as prostatitis at 2 different field strengths1.5 versus 3 T. METHODSSixty-six patients with biopsy and/or prostatectomy of the prostate were included in the study. Magnetic resonance imaging was performed at 1.5 T in 20 patients with biopsy-proven prostate cancer (PC) and in 8 patients with prostatitis; at 3 T, we analyzed 27 patients with prostatectomy-proven PC and 11 patients with prostatitis. All examinations were performed using a combined body and endorectal coil protocol and a 2-dimensional TurboFLASH T1-weighted gradient echo sequence to calculate plasma flow (PF) and mean transit time (MTT) values. A total of 28 of 38 areas of normal prostate tissue, 20 of 27 areas of PC, and 8 of 11 prostatitis were analyzed at 1.5 or 3T. For the normalization, we calculated PC/normal and prostatitis/normal tissue ratios of PF and MTT for each patient. RESULTSProstate cancer showed higher PF (P < 0.0001) and shorter MTT (P < 0.0001) at 3 T and at 1.5 T (P < 0.0001 for PF and P = 0.0016 for MTT) compared with the normal tissue. In comparison with the normal tissue, prostatitis had a statistically significant higher PF at 1.5 T (P = 0.0156) but not at 3 T (P = 0.17) and no significantly shorter MTT values both at 3 (P = 0.15) and 1.5 T (P = 0.25). Sensitivity and specificity for differentiating PC from prostatitis with PF were 46% and 88% at 1.5 T (cutoff ratio, 2.3) and 89% and 73% at 3 T (cutoff ratio, 1.2), respectively. Sensitivity and specificity for MTT were 77% and 100% at 1.5 T (cutoff ratio, 0.7) and 70% and 100% at 3 T (cutoff ratio, 0.6), respectively. We found no significant relationship between the Gleason score and PF/MTT (P = 0.17/0.11 for 1.5 T and P = 0.23/0.18 for 3 T). CONCLUSIONSThe differentiation between PC and the normal tissue is possible with both field strengths. Prostate cancer can be better distinguished from prostatitis at 3 T compared with 1.5 T. The differentiation between prostatitis and the normal tissue is limited at both field strengths.
ISSN:0020-9996
1536-0210
DOI:10.1097/RLI.0b013e31827bbcbe