Preoperative magnetic resonance imaging for detecting uni- and bilateral extraprostatic disease in patients with prostate cancer
- PMID: 25059766
- PMCID: PMC4480330
- DOI: 10.1007/s00345-014-1362-x
Preoperative magnetic resonance imaging for detecting uni- and bilateral extraprostatic disease in patients with prostate cancer
Abstract
Objective: The objective of the study was to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of preoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for detecting uni- and bilateral extraprostatic disease (T3) in patients with prostate cancer (PCa).
Materials and methods: This prospective study included 199 patients with biopsy-proven PCa who underwent MRI prior to radical prostatectomy from December 2009 to July 2012. Extraprostatic extension and seminal vesicle invasion represented T3 disease, and was classified as uni- (right or left) or bilateral. MRI detection of T3 disease was assessed by descriptive statistics and odds ratio (OR). Whole-mount histopathology was used as the reference standard.
Results: The overall prevalence of pT3 was 105/199 (53 %), unilateral in 81/105 (77 %) and bilateral in 24/105 (23 %). The sensitivity of MRI for predicting pT3 was 76/105 (72 %), specificity 61/94 (65 %), accuracy 137/199 (69 %), and OR 4.8 (95 % CI 2.7-8.8). A complete match with respect to the laterality of pT3 was found in 52/105 (50 %), and the side-specific accuracy was 113/199 (57 %). When unilateral pT3 was found, MRI falsely suggested contralateral T3 in 4/81 (5 %) and bilateral in 8/81 (10 %). When bilateral pT3 was found, MRI falsely suggested unilateral T3 in 12/24 (50 %).
Conclusion: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) detected 72 % of all patients with T3 disease, and the accuracy dropped from 69 to 57 % when considering the laterality of T3. Thus far, the MRI technique is not yet adequate to meet the increasing demands of accurate diagnosis of locally advanced disease, and the contemporary MRI staging should be careful.
Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01347320.
Figures
References
-
- Obek C, Louis P, Civantos F, Soloway MS (1999) Comparison of digital rectal examination and biopsy results with the radical prostatectomy specimen. JURO 161:494–8, discussion 498–9 - PubMed
-
- Flanigan RC, Catalona WJ, Richie JP, et al. Accuracy of digital rectal examination and transrectal ultrasonography in localizing prostate cancer. JURO. 1994;152:1506–1509. - PubMed
-
- Delongchamps NB, Rouanne M, Flam T, et al. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging for the detection and localization of prostate cancer: combination of T2-weighted, dynamic contrast-enhanced and diffusion-weighted imaging. BJU Int. 2010;107:1411–1418. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2010.09808.x. - DOI - PubMed
MeSH terms
Associated data
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical
