Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Abdominal Radiology 3/2019

15.10.2018

Prostate MRI using an external phased array wearable pelvic coil at 3T: comparison with an endorectal coil

verfasst von: Rory L. O’Donohoe, Ruth M. Dunne, Vera Kimbrell, Clare M. Tempany

Erschienen in: Abdominal Radiology | Ausgabe 3/2019

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Purpose

To evaluate T2w and DWI image quality using a wearable pelvic coil (WPC) compared with an endorectal coil (ERC).

Methods

Twenty men consecutively presenting to our prostate cancer MRI clinic were prospectively consented to be scanned using a wearable pelvic coil then an endorectal coil and pelvic phased array coil at 3T. Eighteen patients were suitable for inclusion. Axial T2w images were obtained using the WPC and ERC, and DWI images were obtained using the WPC, ERC, and PPA. Analysis was performed in consensus by two readers with experience in prostate MRI. The readers scored the T2w images using six qualitative criteria and the DWI images using five criteria. Signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) was also measured.

Results

T2w artifact severity was greater for an ERC than a WPC (p = 0.003). There was no significant difference in T2w qualititatve image quality by other measures. The distinction of zonal anatomy on DWI was superior for an ERC compared with both a WPC and a PPA (p = 0.018 and p < 0.001 respectively), and there was no significant difference in DWI image quality by other measures. SNR was significantly higher for ERC imaging for both T2w and DWI.

Conclusion

WPC imaging provides comparable image quality to that of an ERC, potentially reducing the need for an ERC. WPC imaging shows reduced T2w artifact severity and inferior DWI zonal anatomy distinction compared with an ERC. Imaging with a WPC produces a lower SNR than an ERC.
Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat Fusco R, Sansone M, Petrillo M, et al. (2016) Multiparametric MRI for prostate cancer detection: preliminary results on quantitative analysis of dynamic contrast enhanced imaging, diffusion-weighted imaging and spectroscopy imaging. Magn Reson Imaging 34:839–845CrossRefPubMed Fusco R, Sansone M, Petrillo M, et al. (2016) Multiparametric MRI for prostate cancer detection: preliminary results on quantitative analysis of dynamic contrast enhanced imaging, diffusion-weighted imaging and spectroscopy imaging. Magn Reson Imaging 34:839–845CrossRefPubMed
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Kurhanewicz J, Vigneron D, Carroll P, Coakley F (2008) Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in prostate cancer: present and future. Curr Opin Urol 18:71–77CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Kurhanewicz J, Vigneron D, Carroll P, Coakley F (2008) Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in prostate cancer: present and future. Curr Opin Urol 18:71–77CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Donati OF, Mazaheri Y, Afaq A, et al. (2013) Prostate cancer aggressiveness: assessment with whole-lesion histogram analysis of the apparent diffusion coefficient. Radiology 271:143–152CrossRefPubMed Donati OF, Mazaheri Y, Afaq A, et al. (2013) Prostate cancer aggressiveness: assessment with whole-lesion histogram analysis of the apparent diffusion coefficient. Radiology 271:143–152CrossRefPubMed
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Donati OF, Afaq A, Vargas HA, et al. (2014) Prostate MRI: evaluating tumor volume and apparent diffusion coefficient as surrogate biomarkers for predicting tumor gleason score. Clin Cancer Res 20:3705–3711CrossRefPubMed Donati OF, Afaq A, Vargas HA, et al. (2014) Prostate MRI: evaluating tumor volume and apparent diffusion coefficient as surrogate biomarkers for predicting tumor gleason score. Clin Cancer Res 20:3705–3711CrossRefPubMed
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Wu CJ, Wang Q, Li H, et al. (2015) DWI-associated entire-tumor histogram analysis for the differentiation of low-grade prostate cancer from intermediate–high-grade prostate cancer. Abdom Imaging 40:3214–3221CrossRefPubMed Wu CJ, Wang Q, Li H, et al. (2015) DWI-associated entire-tumor histogram analysis for the differentiation of low-grade prostate cancer from intermediate–high-grade prostate cancer. Abdom Imaging 40:3214–3221CrossRefPubMed
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Costa DN, Bloch BN, Yao DF, et al. (2013) Diagnosis of relevant prostate cancer using supplementary cores from magnetic resonance imaging-prompted areas following multiple failed biopsies. Magn Reson Imaging 31:947–952CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Costa DN, Bloch BN, Yao DF, et al. (2013) Diagnosis of relevant prostate cancer using supplementary cores from magnetic resonance imaging-prompted areas following multiple failed biopsies. Magn Reson Imaging 31:947–952CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Cornud F, Brolis L, Delongchamps NB, et al. (2013) TRUS–MRI image registration: a paradigm shift in the diagnosis of significant prostate cancer. Abdom Imaging 38:1447–1463CrossRefPubMed Cornud F, Brolis L, Delongchamps NB, et al. (2013) TRUS–MRI image registration: a paradigm shift in the diagnosis of significant prostate cancer. Abdom Imaging 38:1447–1463CrossRefPubMed
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Hoeks CMA, Somford DM, van Oort IM, et al. (2014) Value of 3-T multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and magnetic resonance-guided biopsy for early risk restratification in active surveillance of low-risk prostate cancer: a prospective multicenter cohort study. Invest Radiol 49:165–172CrossRefPubMed Hoeks CMA, Somford DM, van Oort IM, et al. (2014) Value of 3-T multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and magnetic resonance-guided biopsy for early risk restratification in active surveillance of low-risk prostate cancer: a prospective multicenter cohort study. Invest Radiol 49:165–172CrossRefPubMed
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Ahmed HU, El-Shater Bosaily A, Brown LC, et al. (2017) Diagnostic accuracy of multi-parametric MRI and TRUS biopsy in prostate cancer (PROMIS): a paired validating confirmatory study. Lancet 389:815–822CrossRefPubMed Ahmed HU, El-Shater Bosaily A, Brown LC, et al. (2017) Diagnostic accuracy of multi-parametric MRI and TRUS biopsy in prostate cancer (PROMIS): a paired validating confirmatory study. Lancet 389:815–822CrossRefPubMed
10.
Zurück zum Zitat Weinreb JC, Barentsz JO, Choyke PL, et al. (2016) PI-RADS Prostate imaging—reporting and data system: 2015, Version 2. Eur Urol 69:16–40CrossRefPubMed Weinreb JC, Barentsz JO, Choyke PL, et al. (2016) PI-RADS Prostate imaging—reporting and data system: 2015, Version 2. Eur Urol 69:16–40CrossRefPubMed
11.
Zurück zum Zitat Barth BK, Cornelius A, Nanz D, Eberli D, Donati OF (2016) Comparison of image quality and patient discomfort in prostate MRI: pelvic phased array coil vs. endorectal coil. Abdom Radiol 41:2218–2226CrossRef Barth BK, Cornelius A, Nanz D, Eberli D, Donati OF (2016) Comparison of image quality and patient discomfort in prostate MRI: pelvic phased array coil vs. endorectal coil. Abdom Radiol 41:2218–2226CrossRef
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Turkbey B, Merino MJ, Gallardo EC, et al. (2014) Comparison of endorectal coil and nonendorectal coil T2 W and diffusion-weighted MRI at 3 Tesla for localizing prostate cancer: correlation with whole-mount histopathology. J Magn Reson Imaging 39:1443–1448CrossRefPubMed Turkbey B, Merino MJ, Gallardo EC, et al. (2014) Comparison of endorectal coil and nonendorectal coil T2 W and diffusion-weighted MRI at 3 Tesla for localizing prostate cancer: correlation with whole-mount histopathology. J Magn Reson Imaging 39:1443–1448CrossRefPubMed
14.
Zurück zum Zitat Shah ZK, Elias SN, Baza R, et al. (2015) Performance comparison of 1.5-T endorectal coil MRI with 3.0-T nonendorectal coil MRI in patients with prostate cancer. Acad Radiol 22:467–474CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Shah ZK, Elias SN, Baza R, et al. (2015) Performance comparison of 1.5-T endorectal coil MRI with 3.0-T nonendorectal coil MRI in patients with prostate cancer. Acad Radiol 22:467–474CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
15.
Zurück zum Zitat Sosna J, Pedrosa I, Dewolf WC, et al. (2004) 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 11:857–862CrossRefPubMed Sosna J, Pedrosa I, Dewolf WC, et al. (2004) 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 11:857–862CrossRefPubMed
16.
Zurück zum Zitat Heverhagen JT (2007) Noise measurement and estimation in MR imaging experiments. Radiology 245:638–639CrossRefPubMed Heverhagen JT (2007) Noise measurement and estimation in MR imaging experiments. Radiology 245:638–639CrossRefPubMed
17.
Zurück zum Zitat Kaufman L, Kramer DM, Crooks LE, Ortendahl DA (1989) Measuring signal-to-noise ratios in MR imaging. Radiology 173:265–267CrossRefPubMed Kaufman L, Kramer DM, Crooks LE, Ortendahl DA (1989) Measuring signal-to-noise ratios in MR imaging. Radiology 173:265–267CrossRefPubMed
18.
Zurück zum Zitat Powell DK, Kodsi KL, Levin G, et al. (2014) Comparison of comfort and image quality with two endorectal coils in MRI of the prostate. J Magn Reson Imaging 39:419–426CrossRefPubMed Powell DK, Kodsi KL, Levin G, et al. (2014) Comparison of comfort and image quality with two endorectal coils in MRI of the prostate. J Magn Reson Imaging 39:419–426CrossRefPubMed
19.
Zurück zum Zitat Heijmink SW, Fütterer JJ, Hambrock T, et al. (2007) Prostate cancer: body-array versus endorectal coil MR imaging at 3 T–comparison of image quality, localization, and staging performance. Radiology 244:184–195CrossRefPubMed Heijmink SW, Fütterer JJ, Hambrock T, et al. (2007) Prostate cancer: body-array versus endorectal coil MR imaging at 3 T–comparison of image quality, localization, and staging performance. Radiology 244:184–195CrossRefPubMed
20.
Zurück zum Zitat Park BK, Kim B, Kim CK, Lee HM, Kwon GY (2007) Comparison of phased-array 3.0-T and endorectal 1.5-T magnetic resonance imaging in the evaluation of local staging accuracy for prostate cancer. J Comput Assist Tomogr 31:534–538CrossRefPubMed Park BK, Kim B, Kim CK, Lee HM, Kwon GY (2007) Comparison of phased-array 3.0-T and endorectal 1.5-T magnetic resonance imaging in the evaluation of local staging accuracy for prostate cancer. J Comput Assist Tomogr 31:534–538CrossRefPubMed
21.
Zurück zum Zitat Torricelli P, Cinquantini F, Ligabue G, et al. (2006) Comparative evaluation between external phased array coil at 3T and endorectal coil at 1.5T: preliminary results. J Comput Assist Tomogr 30:355CrossRefPubMed Torricelli P, Cinquantini F, Ligabue G, et al. (2006) Comparative evaluation between external phased array coil at 3T and endorectal coil at 1.5T: preliminary results. J Comput Assist Tomogr 30:355CrossRefPubMed
23.
Zurück zum Zitat Fütterer JJ, Engelbrecht MR, Jager GJ, et al. (2007) Prostate cancer: comparison of local staging accuracy of pelvic phased-array coil alone versus integrated endorectal-pelvic phased-array coils. Local staging accuracy of prostate cancer using endorectal coil MR imaging. Eur Radiol 17:1055–1065CrossRefPubMed Fütterer JJ, Engelbrecht MR, Jager GJ, et al. (2007) Prostate cancer: comparison of local staging accuracy of pelvic phased-array coil alone versus integrated endorectal-pelvic phased-array coils. Local staging accuracy of prostate cancer using endorectal coil MR imaging. Eur Radiol 17:1055–1065CrossRefPubMed
24.
Zurück zum Zitat Hricak H, White S, Vigneron D, et al. (1994) Carcinoma of the prostate gland: MR imaging with pelvic phased-array coils versus integrated endorectal–pelvic phased-array coils. Radiology 193:703–709CrossRefPubMed Hricak H, White S, Vigneron D, et al. (1994) Carcinoma of the prostate gland: MR imaging with pelvic phased-array coils versus integrated endorectal–pelvic phased-array coils. Radiology 193:703–709CrossRefPubMed
Metadaten
Titel
Prostate MRI using an external phased array wearable pelvic coil at 3T: comparison with an endorectal coil
verfasst von
Rory L. O’Donohoe
Ruth M. Dunne
Vera Kimbrell
Clare M. Tempany
Publikationsdatum
15.10.2018
Verlag
Springer US
Erschienen in
Abdominal Radiology / Ausgabe 3/2019
Print ISSN: 2366-004X
Elektronische ISSN: 2366-0058
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-018-1804-9

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 3/2019

Abdominal Radiology 3/2019 Zur Ausgabe

Classics in Abdominal Radiology

The “zebra spleen”

Update Radiologie

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