Imaging protocols for renal multiparametric MRI and MR urography: results of a consensus conference from the French Society of Genitourinary Imaging.

OBJECTIVES: To develop technical guidelines for magnetic resonance imaging aimed at characterising renal masses (multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging, mpMRI) and at imaging the bladder and upper urinary tract (magnetic resonance urography, MRU). METHODS: The French Society of Genitourinary Imaging organised a Delphi consensus conference with a two-round Delphi survey followed by a face-to-face meeting. Two separate questionnaires were issued for renal mpMRI and for MRU. Consensus was strictly defined using a priori criteria. RESULTS: Forty-two expert uroradiologists completed both survey rounds with no attrition between the rounds. Fifty-six of 84 (67%) statements of the mpMRI questionnaire and 44/71 (62%) statements of the MRU questionnaire reached final consensus. For mpMRI, there was consensus that no injection of furosemide was needed and that the imaging protocol should include T2-weighted imaging, dual chemical shift imaging, diffusion-weighted imaging (use of multiple b-values; maximal b-value, 1000 s/mm2) and fat-saturated single-bolus multiphase (unenhanced, corticomedullary, nephrographic) contrast-enhanced imaging; late imaging (more than 10 min after injection) was judged optional. For MRU, the patients should void their bladder before the examination. The protocol must include T2-weighted imaging, anatomical fast T1/T2-weighted imaging, diffusion-weighted imaging (use of multiple b-values; maximal b-value, 1000 s/mm2) and fat-saturated single-bolus multiphase (unenhanced, corticomedullary, nephrographic, excretory) contrast-enhanced imaging. An intravenous injection of furosemide is mandatory before the injection of contrast medium. Heavily T2-weighted cholangiopancreatography-like imaging was judged optional. CONCLUSION: This expert-based consensus conference provides recommendations to standardise magnetic resonance imaging of kidneys, ureter and bladder. KEY POINTS: • Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) aims at characterising renal masses; magnetic resonance urography (MRU) aims at imaging the urinary bladder and the collecting systems. • For mpMRI, no injection of furosemide is needed. • For MRU, an intravenous injection of furosemide is mandatory before the injection of contrast medium; heavily T2-weighted cholangiopancreatography-like imaging is optional.

Imaging protocols for CT urography: results of a consensus conference from the French Society of Genitourinary Imaging.

OBJECTIVES: To develop technical guidelines for computed tomography urography. METHODS: The French Society of Genitourinary Imaging organised a Delphi consensus conference with a two-round Delphi survey followed by a face-to-face meeting. Consensus was strictly defined using a priori criteria. RESULTS: Forty-two expert uro-radiologists completed both survey rounds with no attrition between the rounds. Ninety-six (70%) of the initial 138 statements of the questionnaire achieved final consensus. An intravenous injection of 20 mg of furosemide before iodinated contrast medium injection was judged mandatory. Improving the quality of excretory phase imaging through oral or intravenous hydration of the patient or through the use of an abdominal compression device was not deemed necessary. The patient should be imaged in the supine position and placed in the prone position only at the radiologist's request. The choice between single-bolus and split-bolus protocols depends on the context, but split-bolus protocols should be favoured whenever possible to decrease patient irradiation. Repeated single-slice test acquisitions should not be performed to decide of the timing of excretory phase imaging; instead, excretory phase imaging should be performed 7 min after the injection of the contrast medium. The optimal combination of unenhanced, corticomedullary phase and nephrographic phase imaging depends on the context; suggestions of protocols are provided for eight different clinical situations. CONCLUSION: This expert-based consensus conference provides recommendations to standardise the imaging protocol for computed tomography urography. KEY POINTS: • To improve excretory phase imaging, an intravenous injection of furosemide should be performed before the injection of iodinated contrast medium. • Systematic oral or intravenous hydration is not necessary to improve excretory phase imaging. • The choice between single-bolus and split-bolus protocols depends on the context, but split-bolus protocols should be favoured whenever possible to decrease patient irradiation.

Stiffness of benign and malignant prostate tissue measured by shear-wave elastography: a preliminary study.

OBJECTIVES: To measure benign and malignant prostate tissue stiffness using shear-wave elastography (SWE). METHODS: Thirty consecutive patients underwent transrectal SWE in the axial and sagittal planes before prostatectomy. After reviewing prostatectomy specimens, two radiologists measured stiffness in regions corresponding to cancers, lateral and median benign peripheral zone (PZ) and benign transition zone (TZ). RESULTS: Cancers were stiffer than benign PZ and TZ. All tissue classes were stiffer on sagittal than on axial imaging, in TZ than in PZ, and in median PZ than in lateral PZ. At multivariate analysis, the nature of tissue (benign or malignant; P < 0.00001), the imaging plane (axial or sagittal; P < 0.00001) and the location within the prostate (TZ, median PZ or lateral PZ; P = 0.0065) significantly and independently influenced tissue stiffness. On axial images, the thresholds maximising the Youden index in TZ, lateral PZ and median PZ were respectively 62 kPa, 33 kPa and 49 kPa. On sagittal images, the thresholds were 76 kPa, 50 kPa and 72 kPa, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: SWE can distinguish prostate malignant and benign tissues. Tissue stiffness is influenced by the imaging plane and the location within the gland. KEY POINTS: • Prostate cancers were stiffer than the benign peripheral zone • All tissue classes were stiffer on sagittal than on axial imaging • All tissue classes were stiffer in the transition zone than in the peripheral zone • All tissue classes were stiffer in the median than in the lateral peripheral zone • Taking into account imaging plane and zonal anatomy can improve cancer detection.

Accuracy of Elastic Fusion of Prostate Magnetic Resonance and Transrectal Ultrasound Images under Routine Conditions: A Prospective Multi-Operator Study.

PURPOSE: To evaluate in unselected patients imaged under routine conditions the co-registration accuracy of elastic fusion between magnetic resonance (MR) and ultrasound (US) images obtained by the Koelis Urostation™. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We prospectively included 15 consecutive patients referred for placement of intraprostatic fiducials before radiotherapy and who gave written informed consent by signing the Institutional Review Board-approved forms. Three fiducials were placed in the prostate under US guidance in standardized positions (right apex, left mid-gland, right base) using the Koelis Urostation™. Patients then underwent prostate MR imaging. Four operators outlined the prostate on MR and US images and an elastic fusion was retrospectively performed. Fiducials were used to measure the overall target registration error (TRE3D), the error along the antero-posterior (TREAP), right-left (TRERL) and head-feet (TREHF) directions, and within the plane orthogonal to the virtual biopsy track (TRE2D). RESULTS: Median TRE3D and TRE2D were 3.8-5.6 mm, and 2.5-3.6 mm, respectively. TRE3D was significantly influenced by the operator (p = 0.013), fiducial location (p = 0.001) and 3D axis orientation (p<0.0001). The worst results were obtained by the least experienced operator. TRE3D was smaller in mid-gland and base than in apex (average difference: -1.21 mm (95% confidence interval (95%CI): -2.03; -0.4) and -1.56 mm (95%CI: -2.44; -0.69) respectively). TREAP and TREHF were larger than TRERL (average difference: +1.29 mm (95%CI: +0.87; +1.71) and +0.59 mm (95%CI: +0.1; +0.95) respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Registration error values were reasonable for clinical practice. The co-registration accuracy was significantly influenced by the operator's experience, and significantly poorer in the antero-posterior direction and at the apex.