Article Sidebar
Views pdf: 49
ROLE OF MRI IN DIAGNOSIS OF PROSTATE CANCER AT E HOSPITAL
Main Article Content
Abstract
Objective: Value of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was compared with biopsy results of transrectal ultrasound-guided 12-core prostate biopsy. Subjects and methods: A total of 70 patients with clinical, abdominal ultrasound, transrectal ultrasound monitoring of prostate cancer were examined by mpMRI and then transrectal ultrasound-guided 12-core prostate biopsy at E Hospital. Result of MRI were compare with histopathological data. Results: Based on 12 zoned locations, the sensitivity and diagnostic accuracy of tumor detection for peripheral zone were 77,2% và 89,5% for T2-weighted imaging, 79,5% và 89,2% for DWI, and 97,1% và 95,7% for the combined method of MRI, respectively and for transition zone were 75,8% và 83,1% for T2-weighted imaging, 80,9% và 86,2% for DWI, and 88,2% và 87,1% for the combined method of MRI. The sensitivity of combined MRI to detect tumor was significantly higher than those of the individual methods. Conclusions: Our results showed that 1.5 T mpMRI has a high sensitivity for detection of clinically significant prostate cancer.
Article Details
Keywords
Prostase cancer; Multiparametric-MRI.
References
2. Patrick R. A, Anthony Gao, Evangelia Katsoulakis. et al. Ascertainment of Veterans With Metastatic Prostate Cancer in Electronic Health Records: Demonstrating the Case for Natural Language Processing. JCO clinical cancer informatics 5, 1005-1014 (2021) doi:10.1200/ cci.21.00030.
3. Popita C, Popita AR, Sitar-Taut A. et al. 1.5-Tesla Multiparametric-Magnetic Resonance Imaging for the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer. Clujul medical (1957) 90, 40-48 (2017) doi:10.15386/cjmed-690.
4. Nguyễn Thị Hải Anh & Nguyễn Duy Hùng. Giá trị của xung khuếch tán trong ung thư tuyến tiền liệt: Vùng ngoại vi và vùng chuyển tiếp. Tạp chí Y học Việt Nam 505, 97-101 (2021) doi:10.51298/vmj.v505i2.1100.
5. McNeal J E. The zonal anatomy of the prostate. The Prostate 2, 35-49 (1981) doi:10.1002/ pros.2990020105.
6. Kitajima, Kazuhiro, Kaji. et al. Prostate cancer detection with 3 T MRI: Comparison of diffusion-weighted imaging and dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI in combination with T2-weighted imaging. 31, 625-631 (2010) doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/ jmri.22075.
7. Tamada T, Sone T, Higashi H. et al. Prostate Cancer Detection in Patients With Total Serum Prostate-Specific Antigen Levels of 4–10 ng/mL: Diagnostic Efficacy of Diffusion-Weighted Imaging, Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced MRI, and T2-Weighted Imaging. American Journal of Roentgenology 197, 664-670 (2011) doi:10.2214/ AJR.10.5923.
8. Mohamed Ali EL-Adalany, Ahmed Abd E L-khalek Abd EL-Razek, Tarek EL-Diasty. et al. Comparison between biparametric and multiparametric MR imaging of prostate imaging reporting and data system version 2.1 in detection of prostate cancer. Egypt J Radiol Nucl Med 52, 1-7 (2021) doi:10.1186/s43055-021-00443.
9. Le, Jesse, Tan. et al. Multifocality and Prostate Cancer Detection by Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging: Correlation with Whole-mount Histopathology. European urology 67, 569-576 (2014 ) doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2014.08.079.
10. 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 international 119, 449-455 (2017) doi:10.1111/bju.13657.