Skip to main content
Hauptrubriken
CME Facharzt-Training Webinare Zeitschriften Bücher e.Medpedia Podcast
Service
Jobbörse Info & Hilfe
Fachgebiete
Anästhesiologie Allgemeinmedizin Arbeitsmedizin Augenheilkunde Chirurgie Dermatologie Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe HNO Innere Medizin Kardiologie Neurologie Onkologie und Hämatologie Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie Pädiatrie Pathologie Psychiatrie Radiologie Rechtsmedizin Urologie Zahnmedizin
Themen
Klimawandel und Gesundheit Neues aus dem Markt COVID-19 Praxis und Beruf Seltene Erkrankungen GOÄ & EBM Panorama
Sammlungen
Kasuistiken Algorithmen & Infografiken Blickdiagnosen Arthropedia FlapFinder (für Dermatochirurgen) Videos Kongressberichterstattung Medizin für Apothekerinnen und Apotheker Für Ärztinnen und Ärzte in Weiterbildung Für Medizinstudierende
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
Abdominal Radiology
Erschienen in: Abdominal Radiology 7/2020

07.11.2019 | Special Section: Male pelvis

Prostate magnetic resonance imaging technique

verfasst von: Thais C. Mussi, Ronaldo H. Baroni, Ronald J. Zagoria, Antonio C. Westphalen

Erschienen in: Abdominal Radiology | Ausgabe 7/2020

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Multiparametric magnetic resonance (MR) imaging of the prostate is an excellent tool to detect clinically significant prostate cancer, and it has widely been incorporated into clinical practice due to its excellent tissue contrast and image resolution. The aims of this article are to describe the prostate MR imaging technique for detection of clinically significant prostate cancer according to PI-RADS v2.1, as well as alternative sequences and basic aspects of patient preparation and MR imaging artifact avoidance.
Literatur
1.
2.
Epstein JI, Walsh PC, Carmichael M, Brendler CB (1994) Pathologic and Clinical Findings to Predict Tumor Extent of Nonpapable (Stage T1c) Prostate Cancer. JAMA 271:368–374PubMedCrossRef
3.
Epstein JI, Egevad L, Amin MB, Delahunt B, Srigley JR, Humphrey PA, Grading Committee (2016) The 2014 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference on Gleason Grading of Prostatic Carcinoma: Definition of Grading Patterns and Proposal for a New Grading System. Am J Surg Pathol 40:244–252
4.
Barentsz JO, Richenberg J, Clements R, Choyke P, Verma S, Villeirs G, Rouviere, Logager V, Fütterer JJ (2012) ESUR prostate MR guidelines 2012. Eur Radiol 22:746–757PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
5.
6.
Turkbey B, Rosenkrantz AB, Haider MA, Padhani AR, Villeirs G, Macura KJ, Tempany CM, Choyke PL, Cornud F, Margolis DJ, Thoeny HC, Verma Barentsz J, Weinreb JC (2019) Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2.1: 2019 Update of Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2. Eur Urol 76;340–351PubMedCrossRef
7.
Dewey M, Schink T, Dewey CF (2007) Claustrophobia during magnetic resonance imaging: Cohort study in over 55,000 patients. JMRI 26:1322–1327PubMedCrossRef
8.
Enders J, Zimmermann E, Rief M, Martus P, Klingebiel R, Asbach P, Klessen C, Diederichs G, Bengner T, TeichgräberU, Hamm B, Dewey M (2011) Reduction of claustrophobia during magnetic resonance imaging: methods and design of the “CLAUSTRO” randomized controlled trial. BMC Medical Imaging 11:1-15CrossRef
9.
Munn Z, Moola S, Lisy K, Riitano D, Murphy F (2015). Claustrophobia in magnetic resonance imaging: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Radiography 21:e59–e63CrossRef
10.
Turkbey B, Rosenkrantz AB, Haider MA, Padhani AR, Villeirs G, Macura KJ, Tempany CM, Choyke PL, Cornud F, Margolis DJ, Thoeny HC, Verma S, Barentsz J, Weinreb JC. Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2.1: 2019 Update of Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2. Eur Urol. 2019. pii: S0302-2838(19)30180-0
11.
Zand KR, Reinhold C, Haider MA, Nakai A, Rohoman L, Maheshwari S (2007) Artifacts and pitfalls in MR imaging of the pelvis. JMRI 26:480–497PubMedCrossRef
12.
Venkatanarasimha N, Jenkins SJ, Yang N, Colak E, Kirpalani A (2013) Impact of butylscopolamine on image quality of magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography. EJR 82:583–588CrossRef
13.
Slough RA, Caglic I, Hansen NL, Patterson AJ, Barrett T (2018). Effect of hyoscine butylbromide on prostate multiparametric MRI anatomical and functional image quality. Clin Radiol 73:216.e9–216.e14CrossRef
14.
Ullrich T, Quentin M, Schmaltz AK, Arsov C, Rubbert C, Blondin D, Rabenalt R, Albers P, Antoch G, Schimmöller L (2017) Hyoscine butylbromide significantly decreases motion artefacts and allows better delineation of anatomic structures in mp-MRI of the prostate. Eur Radiol 28:17-23PubMedCrossRef
15.
Wagner M, Rief M, Busch J, Scheurig C, Taupitz M, Hamm B, Franiel T (2010) Effect of butylscopolamine on image quality in MRI of the prostate. Clin Radiol 65:460–464PubMedCrossRef
16.
Kabakus IM, Borofsky S, Mertan FV, Greer M, Daar D, Wood BJ, Pinto PA, Choyke PL, Turkbey B (2016) Does Abstinence From Ejaculation Before Prostate MRI Improve Evaluation of the Seminal Vesicles? AJR 207:1205–1209PubMedCrossRef
17.
MD CS. Re: Does Abstinence from Ejaculation before Prostate MRI Improve Evaluation of the Seminal Vesicles? Journal of Urology. American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc; 2017 Jun 1;197(6):1536.
18.
Siegel C (2017). Re: Does Abstinence from Ejaculation before Prostate MRI Improve Evaluation of the Seminal Vesicles? J Urol 197:1536PubMedCrossRef
19.
Shin T, Kaji Y, Shukuya T, Nozaki M, Soh S, Okada H (2018) Significant changes of T2 value in the peripheral zone and seminal vesicles after ejaculation. Eur Radiol 28:1009–1015PubMedCrossRef
20.
Starobinets O, Korn N, Iqbal S, Noworolski SM, Zagoria R, Kurhanewicz J, Westphalen AC (2016) Practical aspects of prostate MRI: hardware and software considerations, protocols, and patient preparation. Abdom Radiol 41:817–830CrossRef
21.
Gold GE, Suh B, Sawyer-Glover A, Beaulieu C (2004) Musculoskeletal MRI at 3.0 T: initial clinical experience. AJR 183(5):1479–1486
22.
de Bazelaire CMJ, Duhamel GD, Rofsky NM, Alsop DC (2004) MR Imaging Relaxation Times of Abdominal and Pelvic Tissues Measured in Vivo at 3.0 T: Preliminary Results. Radiology 230:652–659PubMedCrossRef
23.
Beyersdorff D, Taymoorian K, Knösel T, Schnorr D, Felix R, Hamm B, Bruhn H (2005) MRI of Prostate Cancer at 1.5 and 3.0 T: Comparison of Image Quality in Tumor Detection and Staging. AJR 185:1214–1220PubMedCrossRef
24.
Ullrich T, Quentin M, Oelers C, Dietzel F, Sawicki LM, Arsov C, Rabenalt R, Albers P, Antoch C, Blondin D, Wittsack HJ, Schimmöller L (2017) Magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate at 1.5 versus 3.0T: A prospective comparison study of image quality. Eur J Radiol 90:192–19725
25.
Schnall MD, Lenkinski RE, Pollack HM, Imai Y, Kressel HY. Prostate: MR imaging with an endorectal surface coil. Radiology. 1989 Aug;172(2):570–4.PubMedCrossRef
26.
Margolis DJA (2014) Multiparametric MRI for Localized Prostate Cancer: Lesion Detection and Staging. BioMed Res 2014:68412727.
27.
Gawlitza J, Reiss-Zimmermann M, Thörmer G, Schaudinn A, Linder N, Garnov N, Horn LC, Minh DH, Ganzer R, Stolzenburg JU, Kahn T, Moche T, Busse H (2017) Impact of the use of an endorectal coil for 3 T prostate MRI on image quality and cancer detection rate. Sci Rep 7(1):331–338CrossRef
28.
Costa DN, Yuan Q, Xi Y, Rofsky NM, Lenkinski RE, Lotan Y, Roehrborn CG, Francis F, Travalini D, Pedrosa I (2016). Comparison of prostate cancer detection at 3-T MRI with and without an endorectal coil_ A prospective, paired-patient study. Urol Oncol Sem Ori 34:255.e7–255.e13CrossRef
29.
Kim BS, Kim T-H, Kwon TG, Yoo ES (2012). Comparison of Pelvic Phased-Array versus Endorectal Coil Magnetic Resonance Imaging at 3 Tesla for Local Staging of Prostate Cancer. Yonsei Med J 53:550–557.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
30.
Torricelli P, Cinquantini F, Ligabue G, Bianchi G, Sighinolfi P, Romagnoli R (2006) Comparative evaluation between external phased array coil at 3 T and endorectal coil at 1.5 T: preliminary results. JCAT 30:355–361
31.
Shah ZK, Elias SN, Abaza R, Zynger DL, DeRenne LA, Knopp MV, Guo B, Schurr R, Heymsfield SB, Jia G (2015) Performance Comparison of 1.5-T Endorectal Coil MRI with 3.0-T Nonendorectal Coil MRI in Patients with Prostate Cancer. Acad Radiol 22:467–474PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
32.
Wilder RB, Chittenden L, Mesa AV, Bunyapansarn J, Agustin J, Lizarde J, Ravera J, Tokita KM (2010) A Prospective Study of Intrafraction Prostate Motion in the Prone vs. Supine Position. Int J Radiation Oncology Biol Phys 77:165–170CrossRef
33.
Tamada T, Sone T, Jo Y, Yamamoto A, Yamashita T, Egashira N, Imai S Fukunaka M (2008) Prostate Cancer: Relationships between Postbiopsy Hemorrhage and Tumor Detectability at MR Diagnosis. Radiology 248:531–539PubMedCrossRef
34.
White S, Hricak H, Forstner R, Kurhanewicz J, Vigneron DB, Zaloudek CJ, Weiss JM, Narayan P, Carroll PR (1995) Prostate cancer: effect of postbiopsy hemorrhage on interpretation of MR images. Radiology 195:385–390PubMedCrossRef
35.
Pasoglou V, Michoux N, Peeters F, Larbi A, Tombal B, Selleslagh T, Omoumi P, Vande Berg BC, Lecouvet FE (2015) Whole-Body 3D T1-weighted MR Imaging in Patients with Prostate Cancer: Feasibility and Evaluation in Screening for Metastatic Disease. Radiology 275:155–166PubMedCrossRef
36.
Kuhl CK, Bruhn R, Krämer N, Nebelung S, Heidenreich A, Schrading S (2017) Abbreviated Biparametric Prostate MR Imaging in Men with Elevated Prostate-specific Antigen. Radiology 285:493–505PubMedCrossRef
37.
Rosenkrantz AB, Neil J, Kong X, Melamed J, Babb JS, Taneja SS, Taouli B (2010) Prostate Cancer: Comparison of 3D T2-Weighted With Conventional 2D T2-Weighted Imaging for Image Quality and Tumor Detection. AJR 194:446–452PubMedCrossRef
38.
Westphalen AC, Noworolski SM, Harisinghani M, Jhaveri KS, Raman SS, Rosenkrantz AB, Wang ZJ, Zagoria RJ, Kurhanewicz J (2016) High-Resolution 3-T Endorectal Prostate MRI: A Multireader Study of Radiologist Preference and Perceived Interpretive Quality of 2D and 3D T2-Weighted Fast Spin-Echo MR Images. AJR 206:86–91PubMedCrossRef
39.
Turkbey B, Shah VP, Pang Y, Bernardo M, Xu S, Kruecker J, Locklin J, Baccala Jr AA, Rastinehad AR, Merino MJ, Shih JH, Wood BJ, Pinto PA, Choyke PL (2011) Is apparent diffusion coefficient associated with clinical risk scores for prostate cancers that are visible on 3-T MR images? Radiology. 258:488–495PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
40.
Rosenkrantz AB, Chandarana H, Hindman N, Deng F-M, Babb JS, Taneja SS, Geppert C (2013) Computed diffusion-weighted imaging of the prostate at 3 T: impact on image quality and tumour detection. Eur Radiol 23:3170–3177PubMedCrossRef
41.
Rosenkrantz AB, Hindman N, Lim RP, Das K, Babb JS, Mussi TC, Taneja S (2013) Diffusion-weighted imaging of the prostate: Comparison of b1000 and b2000 image sets for index lesion detection. JMRI 38:694–700PubMedCrossRef
42.
Hambrock T, Somford DM, Huisman HJ, van Oort IM, Witjes JA, Hulsbergen-van de Kaa CA, Scheenen T, Barentsz JO (2011) Relationship between Apparent Diffusion Coefficients at 3.0-T MR Imaging and Gleason Grade in Peripheral Zone Prostate Cancer. Radiology 259:453–461PubMedCrossRef
43.
Kim CK, Park BK, Kim B (2010) Diffusion-Weighted MRI at 3 T for the Evaluation of Prostate Cancer. AJR 194:1461–1469PubMedCrossRef
44.
Ueno Y, Takahashi S, Ohno Y, Kitajima K, Yui M, Kassai Y, Kawakami F, Miyake H, Sugimura K (2015) Computed diffusion-weighted MRI for prostate cancer detection: the influence of the combinations of b-values. BJR 88:20140738PubMedCrossRef
45.
Metens T, Miranda D, Absil J, Matos C (2011) What is the optimal b value in diffusion-weighted MR imaging to depict prostate cancer at 3T? Eur Radiol 22:703–709PubMedCrossRef
46.
Wang X, Qian Y, Liu B, Cao L, Fan Y, Zhang JJ, Yu Y (2014) High-b-value diffusion-weighted MRI for the detection of prostate cancer at 3T. Clin Radiol 69:1165–1170PubMedCrossRef
47.
Rosenkrantz AB, Kim S, Campbell N, Gaing B, Deng F-M, Taneja SS (2015) Transition Zone Prostate Cancer: Revisiting the Role of Multiparametric MRI at 3 T. AJR 204:W266–W272PubMedCrossRef
48.
Bittencourt LK, Attenberger UI, Lima D, Strecker R, Oliveira A, Schoenberg SO, Gasparetto EL, Hasumann D(2014) Feasibility study of computed vsmeasured high b-value (1400 s/mm²) diffusion-weighted MR images of the prostate. World J Radiol 6:374–378PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
49.
Grant KB, Agarwal HK, Shih JH, Bernardo M, Pang Y, Daar D, Merino MJ, Wood BJ, Pinto PA, Choyke PL, Turkbey B (2015) Comparison of calculated and acquired high b value diffusion-weighted imaging in prostate cancer. Abdom Imaging 40:578–586PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
50.
Koh D-M, Collins DJ, Orton MR (2011) Intravoxel Incoherent Motion in Body Diffusion-Weighted MRI: Reality and Challenges. AJR 196:1351–1361PubMedCrossRef
51.
Feng Z, Min X, Margolis DJA, Duan C, Chen Y, Sah VK, Chaudhary N, Li B, Ke Z, Zhang P, Wang L (2017) Evaluation of different mathematical models and different b-value ranges of diffusion-weighted imaging in peripheral zone prostate cancer detection using b-value up to 4500 s/mm2. PLoS ONE 12:e0172127–15
52.
Koh D-M, Collins DJ (2007) Diffusion-Weighted MRI in the Body: Applications and Challenges in Oncology. AJR 188:1622–1635PubMedCrossRef
53.
Tamada T, Sone T, Jo Y, Toshimitsu S, Yamashita T, Yamamoto A, Tanimoto D, Ito K (2008) Apparent diffusion coefficient values in peripheral and transition zones of the prostate: Comparison between normal and malignant prostatic tissues and correlation with histologic grade. JMRI 28:720–726PubMedCrossRef
54.
Liu X, Peng W, Zhou L, Wang H (2013) Biexponential apparent diffusion coefficients values in the prostate: comparison among normal tissue, prostate cancer, benign prostatic hyperplasia and prostatitis. Korean J Radiol 14:222–232PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
55.
Jambor I, Merisaari H, Aronen HJ, Järvinen J, Saunavaara J, Kauko T, Borra R, Pesola M (2013) Optimization of b-value distribution for biexponential diffusion-weighted MR imaging of normal prostate. JMRI 39:1213–1222PubMedCrossRef
56.
Shinmoto H, Tamura C, Soga S, Shiomi E, Yoshihara N, Kaji T, Mulkern RV (2012) An Intravoxel Incoherent Motion Diffusion-Weighted Imaging Study of Prostate Cancer. AJR 199:W496–W500PubMedCrossRef
57.
Rosenkrantz AB, Sigmund EE, Johnson G, Babb JS, Mussi TC, Melamed J, Taneja SS, Lee VS, Jensen JH (2012) Prostate cancer: feasibility and preliminary experience of a diffusional kurtosis model for detection and assessment of aggressiveness of peripheral zone cancer. Radiology 264:126–135PubMedCrossRef
58.
Le Bihan D, Breton E, Lallemand D, Grenier P, Cabanis E, Laval-Jeantet M (1986) MR imaging of intravoxel incoherent motions: application to diffusion and perfusion in neurologic disorders. Radiology 161:401–407PubMedCrossRef
59.
60.
Fournet G, Li J-R, Cerjanic AM, Sutton BP, Ciobanu L, Le Bihan D (2017) A two-pool model to describe the IVIM cerebral perfusion. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab 37:2987–3000PubMedCrossRef
61.
Maurer MH, Heverhagen JT (2017) Diffusion weighted imaging of the prostate—principles, application, and advances. Transl Androl Urol 6:490–498PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
62.
White NS, Leergaard TB, D'Arceuil H, Bjaalie JG, Dale AM (2013) Probing tissue microstructure with restriction spectrum imaging: Histological and theoretical validation. Hum Brain Mapp 34:327–346PubMedCrossRef
63.
Brunsing RL, Schenker-Ahmed NM, White NS, Parsons JK, Kane C, Kuperman J, Bartsch H, Kader AK, Rakow-Penner R, Seibert TM, Margolis D, Raman SS, McDonald CR, Farid N, Kesari S, Hansel D, Shabaik A, Dale AM Karow DS (2017) Restriction spectrum imaging: An evolving imaging biomarker in prostate MRI. JMRI 45:323–336PubMedCrossRef
64.
McDonald CR, Delfanti RL, Krishnan AP, Leyden KM, Hattangadi-Gluth JA, Seibert TM, Karunamuni R, Elbe P, Kuperman JM, Bartsch H, Piccioni DE, White NS, Dale AM, Farid N (2016) Restriction spectrum imaging predicts response to bevacizumab in patients with high-grade glioma. Neuro Oncol. 461579–1590
65.
McCammack KC, Schenker-Ahmed NM, White NS, Best SR, Marks RM, Heimbigner J, Kane CJ, Parsons JK, Kuperman JM, Bartsch H, Desikan RS, Rakow-Penner RA, Liss MA, Margolis DJA, Raman SS, Shabaik A, Dale AM, Karow DS (2016) Restriction spectrum imaging improves MRI-based prostate cancer detection. Abd Radiol 41:946–953CrossRef
66.
Verma S, Turkbey B, Muradyan N, Rajesh A, Cornud F, Haider MA, Choyke PL, Harisinghani M (2012) Overview of Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced MRI in Prostate Cancer Diagnosis and Management. AJR 198:1277–1288PubMedCrossRef
67.
Hansford BG, Peng Y, Jiang Y, Vannier MW, Antic T, Thomas S, McCann S, Oto A (2015) Dynamic Contrast-enhanced MR Imaging Curve-type Analysis: Is It Helpful in the Differentiation of Prostate Cancer from Healthy Peripheral Zone? Radiology 275:448–457PubMedCrossRef
68.
69.
Tofts PS, Kermode AG (1991) Measurement of the blood-brain barrier permeability and leakage space using dynamic MR imaging. 1. Fundamental concepts. Magn Reson Med 17:357–367PubMedCrossRef
70.
Parra AN, Lu H, Li Q, Stoyanova R, Pollack A, Punnen S, Choi J, Abdalah M, Lopez C, Gage K, Park JY, Kosj Y, Pow-Sang JM, Gillies RJ, Balagurunathan Y (2018) Predicting clinically significant prostate cancer using DCE-MRI habitat descriptors. Oncotarget 9:37125–37136PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
71.
Fennessy FM, Fedorov A, Gupta SN, Schmidt EJ, Tempany CM, Mulkern RV (2012) Practical considerations in T1 mapping of prostate for dynamic contrast enhancement pharmacokinetic analyses. Magn Reson Imaging 30:1224–1233PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
72.
Kingsley PB (1999) Methods of measuring spin-lattice (T1) relaxation times: an annotated bibliography. Concepts in Magnetic Resonance 11(4);243–276CrossRef
73.
Treier R, Steingoetter A, Fried M, Schwizer W, Boesiger P (2007) Optimized and combined T1 and B1 mapping technique for fast and accurateT1 quantification in contrast-enhanced abdominal MRI. Magn Reson Med 57(3):568–576PubMedCrossRef
74.
Cheng H-LM, Wright GA (2006) Rapid high-resolutionT1 mapping by variable flip angles: Accurate and precise measurements in the presence of radiofrequency field inhomogeneity. Magn Reson Med 55(3):566–574PubMedCrossRef
75.
Rais-Bahrami S, Siddiqui MM, Vourganti S, Turkbey B, Rastinehad AR, Stamatakis L, Truong H, Walton-Diaz A, Hoang AN, Nix JW, Merino MJ, Wood BJ, Simon RM, Choyke PL, Pinto PA (2014) Diagnostic value of biparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) as an adjunct to prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-based detection of prostate cancer in men without prior biopsies. BJU Int 115:381–388PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
76.
Fascelli M, Rais-Bahrami S, Sankineni S, Brown AM, George AK, Ho R, Frye T, Kilchevsky A, Chelluri R,
 Abboud S, Siddiqui MM, Merino MJ, Wood BJ, Choyke PL, Pinto PA, Turkbey B (2016) Combined Biparametric Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Prostate-specific Antigen in the Detection of Prostate Cancer: A Validation Study in a Biopsy-naive Patient Population. Urology 88:125–134PubMedCrossRef
77.
Mussi TC, Martins T, Garcia RG, Filippi RZ, Lemos GC, Baroni RH (2016) Are Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Images Necessary for Prostate Cancer Detection on Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging? Clin Genitourinary Cancer 15:e447–e454CrossRef
78.
Tanimoto A, Nakashima J, Kohno H, Shinmoto H, Kuribayashi S (2007) Prostate cancer screening: The clinical value of diffusion-weighted imaging and dynamic MR imaging in combination with T2-weighted imaging. JMRI 25:146–152PubMedCrossRef
79.
Greer MD, Shih JH, Lay N, Barrett T, Kayat Bittencourt L, Borofsky S, Kabakus IM, Law YM, Marko J, Shebel H, Mertan FV, Merino MJ, Wood BJ, Pinto PA, Summers RM, Choyke PL, Turkbey B (2017) Validation of the Dominant Sequence Paradigm and Role of Dynamic Contrast-enhanced Imaging in PI-RADS Version 2. Radiology 285:859–869PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
80.
Muglia VF, Reis RB, Rocha TO, Silva AR, Noworolski S, Westphalen AC (2018) Hypoenhancing prostate cancers on dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI are associated with poor outcomes in high-risk patients: results of a hypothesis generating study. Abd Radiol 44:723–731CrossRef
81.
McDonald RJ, McDonald JS, Kallmes DF, Jentoft ME, Murray DL, Thielen KR, Williamson EE, Eckel LJ (2015) Intracranial Gadolinium Deposition after Contrast-enhanced MR Imaging. Radiology 275:772–782PubMedCrossRef
82.
Kuo PH, Kanal E, Abu-Alfa AK, Cowper SE (2007). Gadolinium-based MR Contrast Agents and Nephrogenic Systemic Fibrosis. Radiology 242:647–649PubMedCrossRef
83.
Casciani E, Polettini E, Bertini L, Masselli G, Emiliozzi P, Amini M, Pansadoro V, Gualdi GF (2007) Contribution of the MR spectroscopic imaging in the diagnosis of prostate cancer in the peripheral zone. Abdom Imaging 32:796–802PubMedCrossRef
84.
Chen M, Dang HD, Wang JY, Zhou C, Li SY, Wang WC, Zhao WF, Yang ZH, Zhong CY, Li GZ (2008) Prostate cancer detection: comparison of t2-weighted imaging, diffusion-weighted imaging, proton magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging, and the three techniques combined. Acta Radiol 49:602–610PubMedCrossRef
85.
Turkbey B, Pinto PA, Mani H, Bernardo M, Pang Y, McKinney YL, Khurana K, Ravizzini GC, Albert PS, Merino MJ, Choyke PL (2010) Prostate Cancer: Value of Multiparametric MR Imaging at 3 T for Detection–Histopathologifc Correlation. Radiology 255:89–9986
86.
Leapman MS, Wang ZJ, Behr SC, Kurhanewicz J, Zagoria RJ, Carroll PR, et al. Impact of the integration of proton magnetic resonance imaging spectroscopy to PI-RADS 2 for prediction of high grade and high stage prostate cancer. Radiol Bras. 2017 Oct;50(5):299–307PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
87.
Westphalen AC, Coakley FV, Qayyum A, Swanson M, Simko JP, Lu Y, Zhao S, Carroll PR, Yeh BM, Kurhanewicz J (2008) Peripheral Zone Prostate Cancer: Accuracy of Different Interpretative Approaches with MR and MR Spectroscopic Imaging. Radiology 246:177–184PubMedCrossRef
88.
Westphalen AC (2019). Lost in translation: lessons learned from the “demise” of MRSI of the prostate. Abd Radiol 44:3185–318789
89.
Franklin KM, Dale BM, Merkle EM. Improvement in B1-inhomogeneity artifacts in the abdomen at 3T MR imaging using a radiofrequency cushion. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2008 Apr 17;27(6):1443–7.PubMedCrossRef
90.
Sreenivas M, Lowry M, Gibbs P, Pickles M, Turnbull LW (2007) A simple solution for reducing artefacts due to conductive and dielectric effects in clinical magnetic resonance imaging at 3T. Eur J Radiol 62:143–146PubMedCrossRef
91.
Mazaheri Y, Vargas HA, Nyman G, Akin O, Hricak H. Image artifacts on prostate diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging: trade-offs at 1.5 Tesla and 3.0 Tesla (2013) Acad Radiol 20(8):1041–1047
92.
Dietrich O, Reiser MF, Schoenberg S (2008) Artifacts in 3-T MRI: Physical background and reduction strategies. Eur J Radiol 65:29–35PubMedCrossRef
93.
Czarniecki M, Caglic I, Grist JT, Gill AB, Lorenc K, Slough RA, Priest AN, Barrett T (2018) Role of PROPELLER-DWI of the prostate in reducing distortion and artefact from total hip replacement metalwork. Eur J Radiol 102:213–219PubMedCrossRef
94.
Rosenkrantz AB, Taneja SS (2014) Radiologist, Be Aware: Ten Pitfalls That Confound the Interpretation of Multiparametric Prostate MRI. AJR 202(1):109–120PubMedCrossRef
95.
Zhuo J, Gullapalli RP (2006) MR Artifacts, Safety, and Quality Control. Radiographics 26(1):275–297PubMedCrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
Prostate magnetic resonance imaging technique
verfasst von
Thais C. Mussi
Ronaldo H. Baroni
Ronald J. Zagoria
Antonio C. Westphalen
Publikationsdatum
07.11.2019
Verlag
Springer US
Erschienen in
Abdominal Radiology / Ausgabe 7/2020
Print ISSN: 2366-004X
Elektronische ISSN: 2366-0058
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-019-02308-5

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 7/2020

Abdominal Radiology 7/2020 Zur Ausgabe

Special Section: Male pelvis

Cross-sectional imaging of seminal vesicles and vasa deferentia

Special Section: Male pelvis

Imaging of chronic male pelvic pain: what the abdominal imager should know

Special Section: Distinguished Papers from JSAR

MRI features of the nested variant of urothelial carcinoma of the urinary bladder: report of four cases

Special Section: Male pelvis

MRI of the penis

Special Section: Male pelvis

Imaging of the adult male urethra, penile prostheses and artificial urinary sphincters

Special Section: Distinguished Papers from JSAR

Mass-forming hepatic cryptococcosis: a mimicker of metastatic tumors

Neu im Fachgebiet Radiologie

Screening-Mammografie offenbart erhöhtes Herz-Kreislauf-Risiko

26.04.2024 Mammografie Nachrichten

Routinemäßige Mammografien helfen, Brustkrebs frühzeitig zu erkennen. Anhand der Röntgenuntersuchung lassen sich aber auch kardiovaskuläre Risikopatientinnen identifizieren. Als zuverlässiger Anhaltspunkt gilt die Verkalkung der Brustarterien.

S3-Leitlinie zu Pankreaskrebs aktualisiert

23.04.2024 Pankreaskarzinom Nachrichten

Die Empfehlungen zur Therapie des Pankreaskarzinoms wurden um zwei Off-Label-Anwendungen erweitert. Und auch im Bereich der Früherkennung gibt es Aktualisierungen.

Fünf Dinge, die im Kindernotfall besser zu unterlassen sind

18.04.2024 Pädiatrische Notfallmedizin Nachrichten

Im Choosing-Wisely-Programm, das für die deutsche Initiative „Klug entscheiden“ Pate gestanden hat, sind erstmals Empfehlungen zum Umgang mit Notfällen von Kindern erschienen. Fünf Dinge gilt es demnach zu vermeiden.

„Nur wer sich gut aufgehoben fühlt, kann auch für Patientensicherheit sorgen“

13.04.2024 Klinik aktuell Kongressbericht

Die Teilnehmer eines Forums beim DGIM-Kongress waren sich einig: Fehler in der Medizin sind häufig in ungeeigneten Prozessen und mangelnder Kommunikation begründet. Gespräche mit Patienten und im Team können helfen.

Update Radiologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

Newsletter bestellen
Bildnachweise