Clinical utility of endorectal MRI-guided prostate biopsy: preliminary experience.

PURPOSE: To investigate the potential clinical utility of endorectal MRI-guided biopsy in patients with known or suspected prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We prospectively recruited 24 men with known or suspected prostate cancer in whom MRI-guided biopsy was clinically requested after multiparametric endorectal MRI showed one or more appropriate targets. One to six 18-gauge biopsy cores were obtained from each patient. Transrectal ultrasound guided biopsy results and post MRI-guided biopsy complications were also recorded. RESULTS: MRI-guided biopsy was positive in 5 of 7 patients with suspected prostate cancer (including 2 of 4 with prior negative ultrasound-guided biopsies), in 8 of 12 with known untreated prostate cancer (including 5 where MRI-guided biopsy demonstrated a higher Gleason score than ultrasound guided biopsy results), and in 3 of 5 with treated cancer. MRI-guided biopsies had a significantly higher maximum percentage of cancer in positive cores when compared with ultrasound guided biopsy (mean of 37 ± 8% versus 13 ± 4%; P = 0.01). No serious postbiopsy complications occurred. CONCLUSION: Our preliminary experience suggests endorectal MRI-guided biopsy may safely contribute to the management of patients with known or suspected prostate cancer by making a new diagnosis of malignancy, upgrading previously diagnosed disease, or diagnosing local recurrence.

Role of endorectal MR imaging and MR spectroscopic imaging in defining treatable intraprostatic tumor foci in prostate cancer: quantitative analysis of imaging contour compared to whole-mount histopathology.

PURPOSE: To investigate the role of endorectal MR imaging and MR spectroscopic imaging in defining the contour of treatable intraprostatic tumor foci in prostate cancer, since targeted therapy requires accurate target volume definition. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively identified 20 patients with prostate cancer who underwent endorectal MR imaging and MR spectroscopic imaging prior to radical prostatectomy and subsequent creation of detailed histopathological tumor maps from whole-mount step sections. Two experienced radiologists independently reviewed all MR images and electronically contoured all suspected treatable (≥0.5 cm(3)) tumor foci. Deformable co-registration in MATLAB was used to calculate the margin of error between imaging and histopathological contours at both capsular and non-capsular surfaces and the treatment margin required to ensure at least 95% tumor coverage. RESULTS: Histopathology showed 17 treatable tumor foci in 16 patients, of which 8 were correctly identified by both readers and an additional 2 were correctly identified by reader 2. For all correctly identified lesions, both readers accurately identified that tumor contacted the prostatic capsule, with no error in contour identification. On the non-capsular border, the median distance between the imaging and histopathological contour was 1.4mm (range, 0-12). Expanding the contour by 5mm at the non-capsular margin included 95% of tumor volume not initially covered within the MR contour. CONCLUSIONS: Endorectal MR imaging and MR spectroscopic imaging can be used to accurately contour treatable intraprostatic tumor foci; adequate tumor coverage is achieved by expanding the treatment contour at the non-capsular margin by 5mm.

Endorectal MRI and MR spectroscopic imaging of prostate cancer: developing selection criteria for MR-guided focal therapy.

PURPOSE: To investigate criteria that can identify dominant treatable prostate cancer foci with high certainty at endorectal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and MR spectroscopic (MRS) imaging, and thus facilitate selection of patients who are radiological candidates for MR-guided focal therapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively identified 88 patients with biopsy-proven prostate cancer who underwent endorectal MRI and MRS imaging prior to radical prostatectomy with creation of histopathological tumor maps. Two independent readers noted the largest tumor foci at MRI, if visible, and the volume of concordant abnormal tissue at MRS imaging, if present. A logistic random intercept model was used to determine the association between clinical and MR findings and correct identification of treatable (over 0.5 cm3) dominant intraprostatic tumor foci. RESULTS: Readers 1 and 2 identified dominant tumor foci in 50 (57%) and 58 (65%) of 88 patients; 42 (84%) and 48 (83%) of these were dominant treatable lesions at histopathology, respectively. Within the statistical model, the volume of concordant spectroscopic abnormality was the only factor that predicted correct identification of a dominant treatable lesion on T2-weighted images (odds ratio=1.75; 95% confidence interval=1.08 to 2.82; P value=0.02). In particular, all visible lesions on T2-weighted imaging associated with at least 0.54 cm3 of concordant spectroscopic abnormality were correctly identified dominant treatable tumor foci. CONCLUSION: Patients with dominant intraprostatic tumor foci seen on T2-weighted MRI and associated with at least 0.54 cm3 of concordant MRS imaging abnormality may be radiological candidates for MR-guided focal therapy.

Imaging prostate cancer.

This article reviews the anatomy of the prostate gland, magnetic resonance (MR) imaging techniques, and the role MR imaging in the setting of prostate cancer. Sequences discussed include T2-weighted MR imaging, proton ((1)H) MR spectroscopic imaging, diffusion-weighted MR imaging, and dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging. MR imaging can be applied as an adjuvant tool to establish the diagnosis, localize, determine the extent, and estimate the aggressiveness of prostate cancers. The role of transrectal ultrasonography, computed tomography, and radionuclide scans is also briefly discussed.

Imaging late complications of cholecystectomy.

OBJECTIVE: To review the imaging findings in late complications of cholecystectomy. CONCLUSIONS: Late postcholecystectomy complications include papillary stenosis, choledocholithiasis, biliary stricture, remnant gallbladder, and dropped gallstones. Such complications can cause substantial morbidity, and knowledge of the imaging appearances can facilitate expeditious diagnosis and treatment.

Local staging of prostate cancer: comparative accuracy of T2-weighted endorectal MR imaging and transrectal ultrasound.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to compare the accuracy of T2-weighted magnetic resonance (MR) imaging and transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) for staging of prostate cancer. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 101 men with biopsy-proven prostate cancer undergoing both T2-weighted endorectal MR imaging and B-mode TRUS for local tumor staging prior to radical prostatectomy were retrospectively identified. Three MR readers rated the likelihood of locally advanced disease using a 5-point scale. An ultrasound reader performed the same rating. Staging accuracy was compared using receiver operating characteristic curves. RESULTS: Staging accuracy was not significantly different between MR imaging (A(z) = 0.69-0.70) and TRUS (A(z) = 0.81, P>.05). CONCLUSIONS: T2-weighted MR imaging demonstrates comparable accuracy to B-mode TRUS for depicting locally invasive prostate cancer.

Does local recurrence of prostate cancer after radiation therapy occur at the site of primary tumor? Results of a longitudinal MRI and MRSI study.

PURPOSE: To determine if local recurrence of prostate cancer after radiation therapy occurs at the same site as the primary tumor before treatment, using longitudinal magnetic resonance (MR) imaging and MR spectroscopic imaging to assess dominant tumor location. METHODS AND MATERIALS: This retrospective study was HIPAA compliant and approved by our Committee on Human Research. We identified all patients in our institutional prostate cancer database (1996 onward) who underwent endorectal MR imaging and MR spectroscopic imaging before radiotherapy for biopsy-proven prostate cancer and again at least 2 years after radiotherapy (n = 124). Two radiologists recorded the presence, location, and size of unequivocal dominant tumor on pre- and postradiotherapy scans. Recurrent tumor was considered to be at the same location as the baseline tumor if at least 50% of the tumor location overlapped. Clinical and biopsy data were collected from all patients. RESULTS: Nine patients had unequivocal dominant tumor on both pre- and postradiotherapy imaging, with mean pre- and postradiotherapy dominant tumor diameters of 1.8 cm (range, 1-2.2) and 1.9 cm (range, 1.4-2.6), respectively. The median follow-up interval was 7.3 years (range, 2.7-10.8). Dominant recurrent tumor was at the same location as dominant baseline tumor in 8 of 9 patients (89%). CONCLUSIONS: Local recurrence of prostate cancer after radiation usually occurs at the same site as the dominant primary tumor at baseline, suggesting supplementary focal therapy aimed at enhancing local tumor control would be a rational addition to management.

Fast T2*-weighted MRI of the prostate at 3 Tesla.

PURPOSE: To describe a rapid T2*-weighted (T2*W), three-dimensional (3D) echo planar imaging (EPI) sequence and its application in mapping local magnetic susceptibility variations in 3 Tesla (T) prostate MRI. To compare the sensitivity of T2*W EPI with routinely used T1-weighted turbo-spin echo sequence (T1W TSE) in detecting hemorrhage and the implications on sequences sensitive to field inhomogeneities such as MR spectroscopy (MRS). MATERIALS AND METHODS: B(0) susceptibility weighted mapping was performed using a 3D EPI sequence featuring a 2D spatial excitation pulse with gradients of spiral k-space trajectory. A series of 11 subjects were imaged using 3T MRI and combination endorectal (ER) and six-channel phased array cardiac coils. T1W TSE and T2*W EPI sequences were analyzed quantitatively for hemorrhage contrast. Point resolved spectroscopy (PRESS MRS) was performed and data quality was analyzed. RESULTS: Two types of susceptibility variation were identified: hemorrhagic and nonhemorrhagic T2*W-positive areas. Post-biopsy hemorrhage lesions showed on average five times greater contrast on the T2*W images than T1W TSE images. Six nonhemorrhage regions of severe susceptibility artifact were apparent on the T2*W images that were not seen on standard T1W or T2W images. All nonhemorrhagic susceptibility artifact regions demonstrated compromised spectral quality on 3D MRS. CONCLUSION: The fast T2*W EPI sequence identifies hemorrhagic and nonhemorrhagic areas of susceptibility variation that may be helpful in prostate MRI planning at 3.0T.