首页> 外文OA文献 >Transition Zone Prostate Cancer: Detection and Localization with 3-T Multiparametric MR Imaging
【2h】

Transition Zone Prostate Cancer: Detection and Localization with 3-T Multiparametric MR Imaging

机译:过渡带前列腺癌:用3-T多射出型MR成像检测和定位

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

PURPOSE: To retrospectively compare transition zone (TZ) cancer detection and localization accuracy of 3-T T2-weighted magnetic resonance (MR) imaging with that of multiparametric (MP) MR imaging, with radical prostatectomy specimens as the reference standard. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The informed consent requirement was waived by the institutional review board. Inclusion criteria were radical prostatectomy specimen TZ cancer larger than 0.5 cm(3) and 3-T endorectal presurgery MP MR imaging (T2-weighted imaging, diffusion-weighted [DW] imaging apparent diffusion coefficient [ADC] maps [b 1000 sec/mm(2)], and dynamic contrast material-enhanced [DCE] MR imaging). From 197 patients with radical prostatectomy specimens, 28 patients with TZ cancer were included. Thirty-five patients without TZ cancer were randomly selected as a control group. Four radiologists randomly scored T2-weighted and DW ADC images, T2-weighted and DCE MR images, and T2-weighted, DW ADC, and DCE MR images. TZ cancer suspicion was rated on a five-point scale in six TZ regions of interest (ROIs). A score of 4-5 was considered a positive finding. A score of 4 or higher for any ROI containing TZ cancer was considered a positive detection result at the patient level. Generalized estimating equations were used to analyze detection and localization accuracy by using ROI-receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curve analyses for the latter. Gleason grade (GG) 4-5 and GG 2-3 cancers were analyzed separately. RESULTS: Detection accuracy did not differ between T2-weighted and MP MR imaging for all TZ cancers (68% vs 66%, P = .85), GG 4-5 TZ cancers (79% vs 72%-75%, P = .13), and GG 2-3 TZ cancers (66% vs 62%-65%, P = .47). MP MR imaging (area under the ROC curve, 0.70-0.77) did not improve T2-weighted imaging localization accuracy (AUC = 0.72) (P .05). CONCLUSION: Use of 3-T MP MR imaging, consisting of T2-weighted imaging, DW imaging ADC maps (b values, 50, 500, and 800 sec/mm(2)), and DCE MR imaging may not improve TZ cancer detection and localization accuracy compared with T2-weighted imaging. SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL: http://radiology.rsna.org/lookup/suppl/doi:10.1148/radiol.12120281/-/DC1.
机译:目的回顾性比较过渡区(TZ)癌症检测和与该多参数(MP)的MR成像的3-T T2加权的磁共振(MR)成像,与根治性前列腺切除标本作为参考标准的定位精度。材料与方法:在知情同意的要求是由机构审查委员会豁免。纳入标准为根治性前列腺样本TZ癌症大于0.5厘米(3)和3-T直肠内术前MP MR成像时(T2加权成像,扩散加权[DW]成像表观扩散系数[ADC]映射并[b <1000秒/毫米(2)],以及动态对比度材料增强[DCE] MR成像)。从197例前列腺癌根治术标本,28例癌症TZ被列入。 35名患者没有TZ癌症随机选择作为对照组。四个放射随机打进T2加权和DW ADC图像,T2加权和DCE MR图像,和T2加权,DW ADC,和DCE MR图像。 TZ癌症的怀疑被评为在五点量表感兴趣6个TZ区域(ROI)。 4-5得分被认为是阳性结果。的4或更高含TZ癌症任何ROI得分被认为是在患者水平的正的检测结果。广义估计方程用于通过使用ROI-接收机对于后者的操作特性(ROC)曲线分析,以分析检测和定位精度。 Gleason分级(GG)4-5和2-3 GG癌症分别进行了分析。结果:检测精度没有间T2加权和MP MR成像用于所有TZ癌症(68%比66%,P = 0.85)不同,GG 4-5 TZ癌症(79%比72%-75%,P = 0.13),和GG 2-3 TZ癌症(66%比62%-65%,P = 0.47)。 MP MR成像(ROC曲线下面积,0.70-0.77)没有提高T2加权成像的定位精度(AUC = 0.72)(P> 0.05)。结论:使用3-T的MP MR成像,由T2加权成像,DW成像ADC图(B值,50,500,和800秒/毫米(2)),和DCE MR成像的可能无法改善TZ癌症检测和定位精度与T2加权成像比较。补充材料:http://radiology.rsna.org/lookup/suppl/doi:10.1148/radiol.12120281/-/DC1。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号