VALUE OF DIFFUSION-WEIGHTED IMAGING IN DIAGNOSIS OF PROSTATE CANCER IN THE PERIPHERAL ZONE AND TRANSITION ZONE

Nguyễn Thị Hải Anh1,, Nguyễn Duy Hùng1,2
1 Hanoi Medical University
2 Vietnam-Germany Friendship Hospital

Main Article Content

Abstract

Objectives: Evaluation of the value of diffusion weighted imaging (DWI) in the diagnosis of prostate cancer in the peripheral zone and the transition zone. Methods and subject: We reviewed the data of 74 patients including 296 lesions, who underwent magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate and had histopathological results. Suspected lesions were graded by PIRADs for DWI, then, the correlation between the imaging features on DWI and the histopathology of the lesion have DWI grade ≥ III would be analyzed. Results: Among 74 patients with 296 lesions, 182 (61.5%) suspected lesions on DWI (42.8% in peripheral zone, 57.2% in transition zone). Regression analysis showed a remarkable association between high DWI grade and the adverse pathological prognosis expressed by Gleason grade (all with p< 0.05). The concordance rate between DWI grade and histopathology was 77%, NV was remarkably higher than CT (87.8% and 69.9% with p=0.006). This result proved that there is a correlation between the increase in DWI grade and the malignancy of the lesion. Conclusions: In detecting tumors, DWI is more accurate in the peripheral zone than in the transition zone. The higher the DWI grade, the higher the accuracy. Meanwhile, prostate cancer could be found in a small proportion of negative DWI cases.

Article Details

References

1. Turkbey B, Rosenkrantz AB, Haider MA, et al. Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2.1: 2019 Update of Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2. Eur Urol. 2019;76(3):340-351. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2019.02.033
2. Lee H, Hwang SI, Lee HJ, Byun S-S, Lee SE, Hong SK. Diagnostic performance of diffusion-weighted imaging for prostate cancer: Peripheral zone versus transition zone. PLoS One. 2018;13(6):e0199636. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0199636
3. Scheenen TWJ, Rosenkrantz AB, Haider MA, Fütterer JJ. Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance

Imaging in Prostate Cancer Management: Current Status and Future Perspectives. Invest Radiol. 2015;50(9):594-600. doi:10.1097/RLI.0000000000000163
4. Moosavi B, Flood TA, Al-Dandan O, et al. Multiparametric MRI of the anterior prostate gland: clinical-radiological-histopathological correlation. Clin Radiol. 2016;71(5):405-417. doi:10.1016/ j.crad.2016.01.002
5. Akin O, Sala E, Moskowitz CS, et al. Transition zone prostate cancers: features, detection, localization, and staging at endorectal MR imaging. Radiology. 2006;239(3):784-792. doi:10.1148/ radiol.2392050949
6. Polanec S, Helbich TH, Bickel H, et al. Head-to-head comparison of PI-RADS v2 and PI-RADS v1. Eur J Radiol. 2016;85(6):1125-1131. doi:10.1016/j.ejrad.2016.03.025
7. Wysock JS, Mendhiratta N, Zattoni F, et al. Predictive value of negative 3T multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate on 12-core biopsy results. BJU Int. 2016;118(4):515-520. doi:10.1111/bju.13427
8. Le JD, Tan N, Shkolyar E, et al. Multifocality and prostate cancer detection by multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging: correlation with whole-mount histopathology. EurUrol. 2015;67(3): 569-576. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2014.08.079
9. Branger N, Maubon T, Traumann M, et al. Is negative multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging really able to exclude significant prostate cancer? The real-life experience. BJU Int. 2017;119(3):449-455. doi:10.1111/bju.13657