Prostate Imaging - An Update

RoFo Fortschritte auf dem Gebiet der Rontgenstrahlen und der Bildgebenden Verfahren

Volumn 187, Issue 9, 2015, Pages 751-759

  Franiel, T ^a   Asbach, P ^b   Teichgraber U ^a   Hamm, B ^b   Foller, S ^a  

^a JENA UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Germany)

^b CHARITÉ UNIVERSITÄTSMEDIZIN BERLIN   (Germany)

Author keywords

MR imaging; prostate; ultrasound

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CANCER CELL; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER STAGING; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; DIFFUSION WEIGHTED IMAGING; DOPPLER FLOWMETRY; ECHOGRAPHY; ELASTOGRAPHY; HUMAN; MALE; MULTIPARAMETRIC MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE CANCER; PROSTATE VOLUME; PROSTATITIS; PROTON NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE; TRANSRECTAL ULTRASONOGRAPHY; GERMANY; MULTIMODAL IMAGING; ONCOLOGY; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; RADIOLOGY; STANDARDS;

GERMANY; HUMANS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MALE; MEDICAL ONCOLOGY; MULTIMODAL IMAGING; PRACTICE GUIDELINES AS TOPIC; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; RADIOLOGY; ULTRASONOGRAPHY;

EID: 84940460990     PISSN: 14389029     EISSN: 14389010     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1055/s-0035-1553162     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Baras N., Barnes B., Bertz J. et al. Übersicht zu den Krebssterbefällen. In: Krebs in Deutschland. Robert Koch Institut(Hrsg). Berlin: 2013; 17
2. Brock M., von Bodman C., Sommerer F. et al. Comparison of real-time elastography with grey-scale ultrasonography for detection of organ-confined prostate cancer and extra capsular extension: a prospective analysis using whole mount sections after radical prostatectomy. BJU international: 2011; 108 E217 E222
3. Wells P. N., Liang H. D. Medical ultrasound: imaging of soft tissue strain and elasticity. Journal of the Royal Society, Interface/the Royal Society: 2011; 8 1521 1549
4. Langer D. L., van der Kwast T. H., Evans A. J. et al. Intermixed normal tissue within prostate cancer: effect on MR imaging measurements of apparent diffusion coefficient and T2 - sparse versus dense cancers. Radiology: 2008; 249 900 908
5. Junker D., Schafer G., Aigner F. et al. Potentials and limitations of real-time elastography for prostate cancer detection: a whole-mount step section analysis. TheScientificWorldJournal: 2012; 2012 193213
6. Pallwein L., Mitterberger M., Struve P. et al. Comparison of sonoelastography guided biopsy with systematic biopsy: impact on prostate cancer detection. European radiology: 2007; 17 2278 2285
7. Salomon G., Drews N., Autier P. et al. Incremental detection rate of prostate cancer by real-time elastography targeted biopsies in combination with a conventional 10-core biopsy in 1024 consecutive patients. BJU international: 2014; 113 548 553
8. Nygard Y., Haukaas S. A., Halvorsen O. J. et al. A positive real-time elastography is an independent marker for detection of high-risk prostate cancers in the primary biopsy setting. BJU international: 2014; 113 E90 E97
9. Junker D., Schafer G., Kobel C. et al. Comparison of real-time elastography and multiparametric MRI for prostate cancer detection: a whole-mount step-section analysis. American journal of roentgenology: 2014; 202 W263 W269
10. Boehm K., Salomon G., Beyer B. et al. Shear Wave Elastography for Localization of Prostate Cancer Lesions and Assessment of Elasticity Thresholds: Implications for Targeted Biopsies and Active Surveillance Protocols. J Urol: 2015; 193 794
11. Schimmoller L., Quentin M., Arsov C. et al. Predictive power of the ESUR scoring system for prostate cancer diagnosis verified with targeted MR-guided in-bore biopsy. Eur J Radiol: 2014; 83 2103 2108
12. Albrecht T., Blomley M., Bolondi L. et al. Guidelines for the use of contrast agents in ultrasound. January 2004. Ultraschall in der Medizin: 2004; 25 249 256
13. Taverna G., Morandi G., Seveso M. et al. Colour Doppler and microbubble contrast agent ultrasonography do not improve cancer detection rate in transrectal systematic prostate biopsy sampling. BJU international: 2011; 108 1723 1727
14. Braeckman J., Autier P., Garbar C. et al. Computer-aided ultrasonography (HistoScanning): a novel technology for locating and characterizing prostate cancer. BJU international: 2008; 101 293 298
15. Javed S., Chadwick E., Edwards A. A. et al. Does prostate HistoScanning play a role in detecting prostate cancer in routine clinical practice? Results from three independent studies. BJU international: 2014; 114 541 548
16. Schiffmann J., Tennstedt P., Fischer J. et al. Does HistoScanning predict positive results in prostate biopsy? A retrospective analysis of 1188 sextants of the prostate. World journal of urology: 2014; 32 925 930
17. Schiffmann J., Fischer J., Tennstedt P. et al. Comparison of prostate cancer volume measured by HistoScanning and final histopathological results. World journal of urology: 2014; 32 939 944
18. Loch T. Computerized supported transrectal ultrasound (C-TRUS) in the diagnosis of prostate cancer. Der Urologe Ausg A: 2004; 43 1377 1384
19. Grabski B., Baeurle L., Loch A. et al. Computerized transrectal ultrasound of the prostate in a multicenter setup (C-TRUS-MS): detection of cancer after multiple negative systematic random and in primary biopsies. World journal of urology: 2011; 29 573 579
20. Strunk T., Decker G., Willinek W. et al. Combination of C-TRUS with multiparametric MRI: potential for improving detection of prostate cancer. World journal of urology: 2014; 32 335 339
21. Liu W., Turkbey B., Senegas J. et al. Accelerated T2 mapping for characterization of prostate cancer. Magnetic resonance in medicine: official journal of the Society of Magnetic Resonance in Medicine/Society of Magnetic Resonance in Medicine: 2011; 65 1400 1406
22. Stejskal E. O., Tanner J. E. Spin diffusion measurements: spin echos in the presence of a time dependent field gradient. J Chem Phys: 1965; 42 288 292
23. Langer D. L., van der Kwast T. H., Evans A. J. et al. Prostate tissue composition and MR measurements: investigating the relationships between ADC, T2, K(trans), v(e), and corresponding histologic features. Radiology: 2010; 255 485 494
24. Franiel T., Hamm B., Hricak H. Dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging and pharmacokinetic models in prostate cancer. Eur Radiol: 2011; 21 616 626
25. Tofts P. S., Brix G., Buckley D. L. et al. Estimating kinetic parameters from dynamic contrast-enhanced T(1)-weighted MRI of a diffusable tracer: standardized quantities and symbols. J Magn Reson Imaging: 1999; 10 223 232
26. Franiel T. Multiparametrische Magnetresonanztomografie der Prostata - Technik und klinische Anwendungen. Fortschr Röntgenstr: 2011; 183 607 617
27. Roethke M. C., Kuru T. H., Schultze S. et al. Evaluation of the ESUR PI-RADS scoring system for multiparametric MRI of the prostate with targeted MR/TRUS fusion-guided biopsy at 3.0 Tesla. Eur Radiol: 2014; 24 344 352
28. Thompson J. E., Moses D., Shnier R. et al. Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging Guided Diagnostic Biopsy Detects Significant Prostate Cancer and could Reduce Unnecessary Biopsies and Over Detection: A Prospective Study. J Urol: 2014; 192 67 74
29. Franiel T., Stephan C., Erbersdobler A. et al. Areas suspicious for prostate cancer: MR-guided biopsy in patients with at least one transrectal US-guided biopsy with a negative finding - multiparametric MR imaging for detection and biopsy planning. Radiology: 2011; 259 162 172
30. Pokorny M. R., de Rooij M., Duncan E. et al. Prospective study of diagnostic accuracy comparing prostate cancer detection by transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy versus magnetic resonance (MR) imaging with subsequent MR-guided biopsy in men without previous prostate biopsies. Eur Urol: 2014; 66 22 29
31. de Rooij M., Crienen S., Witjes J. A. et al. Cost-effectiveness of magnetic resonance (MR) imaging and MR-guided targeted biopsy versus systematic transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy in diagnosing prostate cancer: a modelling study from a health care perspective. Eur Urol: 2014; 66 430 436
32. Siddiqui M. M., Rais-Bahrami S., Turkbey B. et al. Comparison of MR/ultrasound fusion-guided biopsy with ultrasound-guided biopsy for the diagnosis of prostate cancer. JAMA: 2015; 313 390 397
33. Vargas H. A., Akin O., Franiel T. et al. Diffusion-weighted endorectal MR imaging at 3 T for prostate cancer: tumor detection and assessment of aggressiveness. Radiology: 2011; 259 775 784
34. Beyersdorff D., Lüdemann L., Dietz E. et al. Dynamische kontrastmittelgestützte MRT der Prostata: Vergleich von zwei Auswerteverfahren. Fortschr Röntgenstr: 2011; 183 456 461
35. Sonnad S. S., Langlotz C. P., Schwartz J. S. Accuracy of MR imaging for staging prostate cancer: a meta-analysis to examine the effect of technologic change. Acad Radiol: 2001; 8 149 157
36. Hricak H., Wang L., Wei D. C. et al. The role of preoperative endorectal magnetic resonance imaging in the decision regarding whether to preserve or resect neurovascular bundles during radical retropubic prostatectomy. Cancer: 2004; 100 2655 2663
37. Graham J., Kirkbride P., Cann K. et al. Prostate cancer: summary of updated NICE guidance. Bmj: 2014; 348 f7524
38. Hambrock T., Somford D. M., Hoeks C. et al. Magnetic resonance imaging guided prostate biopsy in men with repeat negative biopsies and increased prostate specific antigen. J Urol: 2010; 183 520 527
39. Vargas H. A., Akin O., Shukla-Dave A. et al. Performance characteristics of MR imaging in the evaluation of clinically low-risk prostate cancer: a prospective study. Radiology: 2012; 265 478 487
40. Sack I., Fischer T., Thomas A. et al. Magnetic resonance elastography of the liver. Der Radiologe: 2012; 52 738 744
41. Singh S., Venkatesh S. K., Wang Z. et al. Diagnostic Performance of Magnetic Resonance Elastography in Staging Liver Fibrosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Individual Participant Data. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol: 2015; 13 440 451
42. Sahebjavaher R. S., Nir G., Honarvar M. et al. MR elastography of prostate cancer: quantitative comparison with histopathology and repeatability of methods. NMR in biomedicine: 2015; 28 124 139
43. Barentsz J. O., Richenberg J., Clements R. et al. ESUR prostate MR guidelines 2012. Eur Radiol: 2012; 22 746 757
44. Röthke M., Blondin D., Schlemmer H. P. et al. PI-RADS-Klassifikation: Strukturiertes Befundungsschema für die MRT der Prostata. Fortschr Röntgenstr: 2013; 185 253 261
45. Schimmoller L., Quentin M., Arsov C. et al. MR-sequences for prostate cancer diagnostics: validation based on the PI-RADS scoring system and targeted MR-guided in-bore biopsy. Eur Radiol: 2014; 24 2582 2589
46. Renard-Penna R., Mozer P., Cornud F. et al. Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System and Likert Scoring System: Multiparametric MR Imaging Validation Study to Screen Patients for Initial Biopsy. Radiology: 2015; 275 458 468
47. Schimmoller L., Quentin M., Arsov C. et al. Inter-reader agreement of the ESUR score for prostate MRI using in-bore MRI-guided biopsies as the reference standard. Eur Radiol: 2013; 23 3185 3190
48. American College of Radiology MR Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2.0. from http://www.acr.org/Quality-Safety/Resources/PIRADS/