MR Imaging of the Prostate in Clinical Practice

Overview

Journal MAGMA

Publisher Springer

Date 2008 Sep 17

PMID 18795354

Citations 28

Authors

Yousef Mazaheri

Amita Shukla-Dave

Ada Muellner

Hedvig Hricak

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is the imaging tool of choice in the evaluation of prostate cancer. The main applications of MR imaging in the management of prostate cancer are: (1) to guide targeted biopsy when prostate cancer is clinically suspected and previous ultrasound-guided biopsy results are negative; (2) to localize and stage prostate cancer and provide a roadmap for treatment planning; and (3) to detect residual or locally recurrent cancer after treatment. Other MR techniques such as proton MR spectroscopic imaging (MRSI), diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI), and contrast-enhanced MRI (CE-MRI) complement conventional MR imaging by providing metabolic and functional information that can improve the accuracy of prostate cancer detection and characterization. In everyday clinical practice, and to account for patient comfort, MR imaging studies are limited to 1 h. To obtain consistently high-quality images, a well-designed protocol is necessary. Routine MR imaging can be supplemented by other MR techniques such as MRSI, DWI or CE-MRI depending on the expertise available and the clinical questions that need to be answered. This review summarizes the role of MR imaging in the management of prostate cancer and describes practical approaches to implementing anatomic, metabolic and functional MR imaging techniques in the clinic.

Citing Articles

Combining Prostate-Specific Antigen Parameters With Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Score Version 2.0 to Improve Its Diagnostic Accuracy.

Baruah S, Das N, Baruah S, Rajeev T, Bagchi P, Sharma D World J Oncol. 2020; 10(6):218-225.

PMID: 31921377 PMC: 6940033. DOI: 10.14740/wjon1230.

Accelerated 3D T w-imaging of the prostate with 1-millimeter isotropic resolution in less than 3 minutes.

Vidya Shankar R, Roccia E, Cruz G, Neji R, Botnar R, Prezzi D Magn Reson Med. 2019; 82(2):721-731.

PMID: 31006906 PMC: 6563534. DOI: 10.1002/mrm.27764.

Cancer detection rate of prebiopsy MRI with subsequent systematic and targeted biopsy are superior to non-targeting systematic biopsy without MRI in biopsy naïve patients: a retrospective cohort study.

Washino S, Kobayashi S, Okochi T, Kameda T, Konoshi T, Miyagawa T BMC Urol. 2018; 18(1):51.

PMID: 29843694 PMC: 5975693. DOI: 10.1186/s12894-018-0361-4.

Nonrigid Registration of Prostate Diffusion-Weighted MRI.

Hao L, Huang Y, Gao Y, Chen X, Wang P J Healthc Eng. 2017; 2017:9296354.

PMID: 29065667 PMC: 5518523. DOI: 10.1155/2017/9296354.

Improved prostate delineation in prostate HDR brachytherapy with TRUS-CT deformable registration technology: A pilot study with MRI validation.

Yang X, Rossi P, Jani A, Mao H, Zhou Z, Curran W J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2017; 18(1):202-210.

PMID: 28291925 PMC: 5689894. DOI: 10.1002/acm2.12040.

References

Mullerad M, Hricak H, Kuroiwa K, Pucar D, Chen H, Kattan M . Comparison of endorectal magnetic resonance imaging, guided prostate biopsy and digital rectal examination in the preoperative anatomical localization of prostate cancer. J Urol. 2005; 174(6):2158-63. DOI: 10.1097/01.ju.0000181224.95276.82. View

Sala E, Eberhardt S, Akin O, Moskowitz C, Onyebuchi C, Kuroiwa K . Endorectal MR imaging before salvage prostatectomy: tumor localization and staging. Radiology. 2005; 238(1):176-83. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2381052345. View

Pruessmann K, Weiger M, Scheidegger M, Boesiger P . SENSE: sensitivity encoding for fast MRI. Magn Reson Med. 1999; 42(5):952-62. View

Chen A, Cunningham C, Kurhanewicz J, Xu D, Hurd R, Pauly J . High-resolution 3D MR spectroscopic imaging of the prostate at 3 T with the MLEV-PRESS sequence. Magn Reson Imaging. 2006; 24(7):825-32. DOI: 10.1016/j.mri.2006.03.002. View

Futterer J, Engelbrecht M, Huisman H, Jager G, Hulsbergen-van de Kaa C, Witjes J . Staging prostate cancer with dynamic contrast-enhanced endorectal MR imaging prior to radical prostatectomy: experienced versus less experienced readers. Radiology. 2005; 237(2):541-9. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2372041724. View

Cornfeld D, Weinreb J . MR imaging of the prostate: 1.5T versus 3T. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am. 2007; 15(3):433-48, viii. DOI: 10.1016/j.mric.2007.06.004. View

Kattan M, Wheeler T, Scardino P . Postoperative nomogram for disease recurrence after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol. 1999; 17(5):1499-507. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.1999.17.5.1499. View

Pickett B, Kurhanewicz J, Pouliot J, Weinberg V, Shinohara K, Coakley F . Three-dimensional conformal external beam radiotherapy compared with permanent prostate implantation in low-risk prostate cancer based on endorectal magnetic resonance spectroscopy imaging and prostate-specific antigen level. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2006; 65(1):65-72. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2005.11.037. View

Scheidler J, Hricak H, Vigneron D, Yu K, Sokolov D, Huang L . Prostate cancer: localization with three-dimensional proton MR spectroscopic imaging--clinicopathologic study. Radiology. 1999; 213(2):473-80. DOI: 10.1148/radiology.213.2.r99nv23473. View

10.

Kurhanewicz J, Dahiya R, MacDonald J, Chang L, James T, Narayan P . Citrate alterations in primary and metastatic human prostatic adenocarcinomas: 1H magnetic resonance spectroscopy and biochemical study. Magn Reson Med. 1993; 29(2):149-57. DOI: 10.1002/mrm.1910290202. View

11.

Yu K, Hricak H . Imaging prostate cancer. Radiol Clin North Am. 2000; 38(1):59-85, viii. DOI: 10.1016/s0033-8389(05)70150-0. View

12.

Gibbs P, Pickles M, Turnbull L . Diffusion imaging of the prostate at 3.0 tesla. Invest Radiol. 2006; 41(2):185-8. DOI: 10.1097/01.rli.0000192418.30684.14. View

13.

Mullerad M, Hricak H, Wang L, Chen H, Kattan M, Scardino P . Prostate cancer: detection of extracapsular extension by genitourinary and general body radiologists at MR imaging. Radiology. 2004; 232(1):140-6. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2321031254. View

14.

Sosna J, Pedrosa I, DeWolf W, Mahallati H, Lenkinski R, Rofsky N . MR imaging of the prostate at 3 Tesla: comparison of an external phased-array coil to imaging with an endorectal coil at 1.5 Tesla. Acad Radiol. 2004; 11(8):857-62. DOI: 10.1016/j.acra.2004.04.013. View

15.

Padhani A, Gapinski C, Macvicar D, Parker G, Suckling J, Revell P . Dynamic contrast enhanced MRI of prostate cancer: correlation with morphology and tumour stage, histological grade and PSA. Clin Radiol. 2000; 55(2):99-109. DOI: 10.1053/crad.1999.0327. View

16.

Brown J, Duncan J, Heiken J, Balfe D, Corr A, Mirowitz S . Perfluoroctylbromide as a gastrointestinal contrast agent for MR imaging: use with and without glucagon. Radiology. 1991; 181(2):455-60. DOI: 10.1148/radiology.181.2.1924788. View

17.

Futterer J, Scheenen T, Huisman H, Klomp D, van Dorsten F, Hulsbergen-van de Kaa C . Initial experience of 3 tesla endorectal coil magnetic resonance imaging and 1H-spectroscopic imaging of the prostate. Invest Radiol. 2004; 39(11):671-80. DOI: 10.1097/00004424-200411000-00005. View

18.

Sella T, Schwartz L, Swindle P, Onyebuchi C, Scardino P, Scher H . Suspected local recurrence after radical prostatectomy: endorectal coil MR imaging. Radiology. 2004; 231(2):379-85. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2312030011. View

19.

Partin A, Pearson J, Landis P, Carter H, Pound C, Clemens J . Evaluation of serum prostate-specific antigen velocity after radical prostatectomy to distinguish local recurrence from distant metastases. Urology. 1994; 43(5):649-59. DOI: 10.1016/0090-4295(94)90180-5. View

20.

DAmico A, Whittington R, Malkowicz S, Fondurulia J, Chen M, Tomaszewski J . The combination of preoperative prostate specific antigen and postoperative pathological findings to predict prostate specific antigen outcome in clinically localized prostate cancer. J Urol. 1998; 160(6 Pt 1):2096-101. DOI: 10.1097/00005392-199812010-00041. View