MRI of the Prostate in Germany: Online Survey among Radiologists.

PURPOSE: To assess structural, technical, and communicative aspects of dedicated MR examinations of the prostate (MRP) offered by radiologists in Germany. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted an eight-item online survey among members of the German Radiology Society (DRG). Radiological institutions were asked about their structure, i.e., either hospital department (HD) or private practice (PP), number of board-certified radiologists, postal regions, number of MRPs in 2011, MR technology and MR sequences applied, ways to communicate results, and feedback from referring physicians on results of subsequent tests and procedures. Submissions were cleared of redundancies and anonymized. Differences in the number of positive replies to each item were statistically significant at p < 0.05 for two-tailed testing in 2 x 2 tables. RESULTS: The survey represented board-certified radiologists in 128 institutions (63 HDs and 65 PPs) in 67/95 German postal regions (71%). Almost two-thirds of institutions performed 11 to 50 MRPs in 2011, more often at 1.5 T (116/128, 91%) than at 3.0 T (36/128, 28%), and most frequently with surface coils (1.5 T, 88/116, 76%; 3.0 T, 34/36, 94%; chi-square, 1.9736, 0.1 < p < 0.25). About two-thirds of 1.5 T users and 90% of 3.0 T users applied at least one functional MR modality (diffusion-weighted imaging, dynamic contrast-enhanced imaging, or MR spectroscopy) for MRP. Reports including graphic representations of the prostate were applied by 21/128 institutions (16%). Clinical feedback after MRP to radiologists other than upon their own request was infrequent (HDs, 32-45%, PPs, 18-32%). CONCLUSION: MRP was a widely available, small-volume examination among radiologists in Germany in 2011. The technology mainstay was a 1.5 T surface coil examination including at least one functional MR modality. Dedicated reporting and feedback mechanisms for quality control were underdeveloped. KEY POINTS: MRI of the prostate was available in at least 67 of 95 German postal regions (71%) in 2011. MRI of the prostate was most often performed at 1.5 T without an endorectal coil in Germany in 2011. At least two thirds of MRI-examinations of the prostate included both T2WI and at least one functional MR test (mostly DWI, less frequently MRS or DCE) in Germany in 2011. Structured reporting including graphic elements was offered by less than 20% of participating radiological institutions. Feedback to radiologists from referring physicians on subsequent test results in patients with MRI of the prostate most frequently came only upon special request by the radiologist.

[CT urography in women with primary or recurrent pelvic tumors : background and initial experiences]. / CT-Urographie bei Frauen mit primären oder rezidivierenden Beckentumoren : Hintergrund und erste Erfahrungen.

Malignant tumors of the female pelvis account for 12-13% of newly diagnosed solid neoplasms among women in the USA and Germany. German guidelines advocate diagnostic imaging for local recurrence and metastasis while there are no recommendations for primary tumors. As excretory urography has been replaced by the excretory phase of computed tomography urography (CTU) in many institutions, two independent observers retrospectively evaluated CTUs of primary or recurrent female pelvic tumors to rule out associations between CTU findings and subsequent urologic measures. Among 31 CTUs of 27 women (age 29-84 years, mean 57 years) with 15 primary and 13 recurrent tumors, 83-100% of unremarkable proximal, middle and distal ureter segments were completely delineated in the excretory phase (delay 6-29 min, mean 16 min). The most common pathological findings included distal ureter obstruction (n=19, 61%), bladder compression (n=13, 42%) and bladder invasion (n=8, 26%). Out of 20 pathologically altered urinary tracts 8 were subsequently subjected to urologic measures (2-tailed Fisher exact test, p=0.0215) but none of the 10 unremarkable urinary tracts were treated. It appears that CTU is a sensible pre-therapeutic test for the urinary tract for primary and recurrent female pelvic tumors.

[Diffusion-weighted MRI of the prostate]. / Diffusionsgewichtete MRT der Prostata.

Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (DWI) can complement MRI of the prostate in the detection and localization of prostate cancer, particularly after previous negative biopsy. A total of 13 original reports and 2 reviews published in 2010 demonstrate that prostate cancer can be detected by DWI due to its increased cell density and decreased diffusiveness, either qualitatively in DWI images or quantitatively by means of the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC). In the prostate, the ADC is influenced by the strength of diffusion weighting, localization (peripheral or transitional zone), presence of prostatitis or hemorrhage and density and differentiation of prostate cancer cells. Mean differences between healthy tissue of the peripheral zone and prostate cancer appear to be smaller for ADC than for the (choline + creatine)/citrate ratio in MR spectroscopy. Test quality parameters vary greatly between different studies but appear to be slightly better for combined MRI and DWI than for MRI of the prostate alone. Clinical validation of DWI of the prostate requires both increased technical conformity and increased numbers of patients in clinical studies.

Catheter-based intraluminal optical coherence tomography versus endoluminal ultrasonography of porcine ureter ex vivo.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the distinction of tissue layers of porcine ureters ex vivo between optical coherence tomography (OCT) and endoluminal ultrasonography (ELUS). Catheter-guided OCT is a new method of intraluminal microstructural imaging, with a spatial resolution of 10-20 mum. METHODS: Porcine ureters and kidneys were obtained fresh from the municipal slaughtery, cannulated with a 7F catheter sheath, flushed with normal saline solution, and marked on the outside with surgical suture. Between the marked positions, images were obtained from within the ureter lumen using OCT (M1, Lightlab, Westport, MA) and ELUS at 40 MHz. The distinction of the urothelium, lamina propria, and inner and outer muscle layers was rated as possible (1) or impossible (0) by 2 independent observers (O1, O2). The rates of distinction were compared between OCT and ELUS image quadrants using the chi(2) test. RESULTS: Of the 224 OCT image quadrants and 144 ELUS image quadrants, OCT was superior to ELUS in the distinction of any wall layers (O1, chi(2)P = 68.1051, P < .001; O2, chi(2)P = 66.1630, P < .001), urothelium and lamina propria (O1, chi(2)P = 200.0750, P < .001; O2, chi(2)P = 240.0024, P < .001), and lamina propria and muscle layer (O1, chi(2)P = 38.8411, P < .001; O2, chi(2)P = 24.7536, P < .001) but was inconclusive for the inner and outer muscle layer (O1, chi(2)P = 260.3004, P < .001; O2, chi(2)P = 0.4992, P > .25). CONCLUSIONS: OCT was able to distinguish significantly better than ELUS between different wall layers of porcine ureter ex vivo. The feasibility of OCT in vivo and in the presence of pathologic wall thickening of the ureter remains to be demonstrated.

[Cost effectiveness of screening procedures for early detection of prostatic carcinoma: an overview]. / Untersuchungen zur Kosteneffizienz von Screeningmassnahmen zur Früherkennung des Prostatakarzinoms: Ein Uberblick.

PURPOSE: The authors attempted to provide an overview of current concepts and the status of research in the field of cost effectiveness analysis (CEA) of screening for prostate cancer (PCA). MATERIAL AND METHODS: Basic concepts and methods of CEA were reviewed. Examples of CEA-related studies of PCA were obtained from pertinent literature through medical databases. RESULTS: Screening for PCA has so far been restricted to limited groups of health care recipients, usually within the framework of clinical trials. In those trials, screening for PCA usually results in higher numbers of PCAs being detected at lower average stages in a given population. As a consequence of screening, the rate of potentially curable PCAs increases. However, it has not yet been demonstrated that screening for PCA decreases PCA-related mortality or morbidity from metastatic PCA. On the other hand, additional costs are associated with the screening measure and with increased use of resources for diagnosis and treatment of the additional PCAs detected through screening. CONCLUSIONS: Throughout the European Union and North America, mass screening for PCA has not been implemented. This may chiefly be due to the current lack of information on long term benefits of PCA screening, particularly disease-specific survival. Currently, major studies are underway to assess the effects of PCA screening and its cost effectiveness. These studies include the US-American prostate, lung, colon and ovary trials (PLCO) and the European randomised study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC).