PROSTAT KANSERİ TANI VE LOKAL İNVAZYON DEĞERLENDİRMESİNDE MULTİPARAMETRİK MANYETİK REZONANS GÖRÜNTÜLEMENİN ÖNEMİ

AmaçProstat kanserinin (PCa) tanısı ve kanser dışı prostathastalıklarından (KDPH) ayırımında multiparametrikmanyetik rezonans görüntülemenin (mpMRG) önemideğerlendirilmiştir.Gereç ve YöntemAralık 2017 ile Ocak 2020 tarihleri arasında, prostatkanseri (PCa) ön tanısı ile mpMRG yapılan 99 hastanın görüntüleri retrospektif olarak değerlendirildi.Standart MpMRG çekim protokolü T2A TSE (aksiyel-koronal-sagital), T1A TSE (axial-koronal-sagital),difüzyon ağırlıklı görüntüleme (DAG) ve T1A dinamik kontrastlı inceleme (DKİ) sekanslarından oluştu. Lezyonların lokasyonu, morfolojisi, ekstraprostatikyayılımı (EPY), T2A sinyal intensite (T2SI) değerleri,difüzyon kısıtlılığı, kontrastlanma eğri paternleri, maksimum kontrastlanma değeri (Cmax) ve maksimumkontrastlanmaya ulaşması için geçen süre (akselerasyon zaman: AZ) değerlendirildi. Bulgular arasındaki ilişki SPSS 20.0 programı ile değerlendirildi.BulgularDeğerlendirilen 99 olgunun 75’inin Prostat Ca (PCa),24’ünün KDPH hitopatolojik tanısı vardı. Tüm hastaların yaş oralaması 66.5±7.4 idi. Periferal zon yerleşimli lezyonlarda “apparent diffusion coefficient”(ADC) (p

IMPORTANCE OF MULTIPARAMETRIC MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING IN PROSTATE CANCER DIAGNOSIS AND LOCAL INVASION ASSESSMENT

Objective The importance of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) in the diagnosis of prostate cancer (PCa) and in its differentiation from non-cancerous prostate diseases (NCPD) was evaluated. Materials and Methods Images of 99 patients who underwent mpMRI with a pre-diagnosis of PCa between December 2017 and January 2020 were retrospectively evaluated. The MpMRG acquisition protocol consisted of T2W TSE (axial-coronal-sagittal), T1W TSE (axial-coronal-sagittal), diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) and T1W dynamic contrast imaging (DCI) sequences. The location, morphology, extraprostatic spread (EPY) of the lesions, T2W signal intensity (T2SI) values, diffusion restriction, enhancement curve patterns, maximum enhancement value (Cmax), time to reach maximum enhancement (acceleration time: AZ) were evaluated. The relationship between the findings was evaluated using the SPSS 20.0 program. Results 75 of 99 cases were diagnosed as Prostate Ca (PCa), 24 of them had NCPD hitopathological diagnosis. The age ratio of all patients was 66.5 ± 7.4. A significant difference was found between the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) (p

PDF

___

1. Jemal A, Siegel R, Ward E, Hao Y, Xu J, Thun MJ. Cancer statistics, 2009. CA Cancer J Clin 2009;59:225–49.
2. Johnson LM, Turkbey B, Figg WD, Choyke PL. Multiparametric MRI in prostate cancer management. Nat Rev Clin Oncol 2014;11:346–53.
3. Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2016. CA Cancer J Clin 2016;66:7–30.
4. Hubanks JM, Boorjian SA, Frank I, Gettman MT, Thompson RH, Rangel LJ, et al. The presence of extracapsular extension is associated with an increased risk of death from prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy for patients with seminal vesicle invasion and negative lymph nodes. Urol. Oncol. Semin. Orig. Investig., vol. 32, Elsevier; 2014, p. 26-e1.
5. Ozcan S, Akin Y, Kose O, Coskun M, Uluc ME, Gorgel SN, et al. The efficacy of multiparametric prostate magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis and treatment of prostate cancer. Exp Biomed Res 2020;3:167–75.
6. Mustafa S, Isil B, Canan A. Multiparametric MR in Prostate Cancer: General Practical Application Advices. UROONKOLOJI Bul UROONCOLOGY 2015;14:136–43.
7. Rosenkrantz AB, Taneja SS. Radiologist, be aware: ten pitfalls that confound the interpretation of multiparametric prostate MRI. Am J Roentgenol 2014;202:109–20.
8. Coşkun M, Türkbey B. PIRADS v2: Tuzaklar 2017.
9. Eri LM, Thomassen H, Brennhovd B, Håheim LL. Accuracy and repeatability of prostate volume measurements by transrectal ultrasound. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2002;5:273–8.
10. Verma S, Turkbey B, Muradyan N, Rajesh A, Cornud F, Haider MA, et al. Overview of dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI in prostate cancer diagnosis and management. Am J Roentgenol 2012;198:1277–88.
11. Requena-López AA, Mata-Samperio BK, Cuadra-Reyes LA, Casillas-Vargas R. Wilkie’s syndrome as a cause of bowel obstruction in adults: A case report. Cir Cir 2020;88:185–8.
12. Uysal A, Özmen M. Prostat Kanseri Tanı ve Yönetiminde Dinamik Kontrastlı MRG 2017.
13. Al-Khalil S, Boothe D, Durdin T, Sunkara S, Watkins P, Yang S, et al. Interactions between benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) and prostate cancer in large prostates: a retrospective data review. Int Urol Nephrol 2016;48:91–7.
14. Chen ME, Troncoso P, Johnston D, Tang K, Babaian RJ. Prostate cancer detection: relationship to prostate size. Urology 1999;53:764–8.
15. de Gorski A, Rouprêt M, Peyronnet B, Le Cossec C, Granger B, Comperat E, et al. Accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging/ ultrasound fusion targeted biopsies to diagnose clinically significant prostate cancer in enlarged compared to smaller prostates. J Urol 2015;194:669–73.
16. Lee CH, Akin-Olugbade O, Kirschenbaum A. Overview of prostate anatomy, histology, and pathology. Endocrinol Metab Clin 2011;40:565–75.
17. Kantarcı M, Tonkaz G. Prostat Kanserinin Değerlendirilmesinde 3 T Difüzyon Ağırlıklı MR Görüntüleme 2017.
18. Weinreb JC, Barentsz JO, Choyke PL, Cornud F, Haider MA, Macura KJ, et al. PI-RADS prostate imaging–reporting and data system: 2015, version 2. Eur Urol 2016;69:16–40.
19. Henderson DR, de Souza NM, Thomas K, Riches SF, Morgan VA, Sohaib SA, et al. Nine-year follow-up for a study of diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging in a prospective prostate cancer active surveillance cohort. Eur Urol 2016;69:1028–33.
20. Jordan EJ, Fiske C, Zagoria R, Westphalen AC. PI-RADS v2 and ADC values: is there room for improvement? Abdom Radiol 2018;43:3109–16.
21. Fütterer JJ, Barentsz JO, Heijmink SW. Value of 3-T magnetic resonance imaging in local staging of prostate cancer. Top Magn Reson Imaging 2008;19:285–9.
22. Baur ADJ, Maxeiner A, Franiel T, Kilic E, Huppertz A, Schwenke C, et al. Evaluation of the prostate imaging reporting and data system for the detection of prostate cancer by the results of targeted biopsy of the prostate. Invest Radiol 2014;49:411–20.
23. Liu W, Turkbey B, Sénégas J, Remmele S, Xu S, Kruecker J, et al. Accelerated T2 mapping for characterization of prostate cancer. Magn Reson Med 2011;65:1400–6.
24. Gibbs P, Liney GP, Pickles MD, Zelhof B, Rodrigues G, Turnbull LW. Correlation of ADC and T2 measurements with cell density in prostate cancer at 3.0 Tesla. Invest Radiol 2009;44:572–6.
25. Hötker AM, Dappa E, Mazaheri Y, Ehdaie B, Zheng J, Capanu M, et al. The influence of background signal intensity changes on cancer detection in prostate MRI. Am J Roentgenol 2019;212:823–9.
26. Wang L, Mazaheri Y, Zhang J, Ishill NM, Kuroiwa K, Hricak H. Assessment of biologic aggressiveness of prostate cancer: correlation of MR signal intensity with Gleason grade after radical prostatectomy. Radiology 2008;246:168–76.
27. Turkbey B, Rosenkrantz AB, Haider MA, Padhani AR, Villeirs G, Macura KJ, 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;76:340–51.
28. Padhani AR, Weinreb J, Rosenkrantz AB, Villeirs G, Turkbey B, Barentsz J. Prostate imaging-reporting and data system steering committee: PI-RADS v2 status update and future directions. Eur Urol 2019;75:385–96.
29. Kim SH, Choi MS, Kim MJ, Kim YH, Cho SH. Role of semi– quantitative dynamic contrast–enhanced MR imaging in characterization and grading of prostate cancer. Eur J Radiol 2017;94:154–9.
30. Dewhirst MW, Tso CY, Oliver R, Gustafson CS, Secomb TW, Gross JF. Morphologic and hemodynamic comparison of tumor and healing normal tissue microvasculature. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1989;17:91–9.
31. Ren J, Huan Y, Wang H, Chang Y-J, Zhao H-T, Ge Y-L, et al. Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI of benign prostatic hyperplasia and prostatic carcinoma: correlation with angiogenesis. Clin Radiol 2008;63:153–9.
32. Hansford BG, Peng Y, Jiang Y, Vannier MW, Antic T, Thomas S, et al. Dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging curve-type analysis: is it helpful in the differentiation of prostate cancer from healthy peripheral zone? Radiology 2015;275:448–57.
33. Cristel G, Esposito A, Briganti A, Damascelli A, Brembilla G, Freschi M, et al. MpMRI of the prostate: is there a role for semi-quantitative analysis of DCE-MRI and late gadolinium enhancement in the characterisation of prostate cancer? Clin Radiol 2019;74:259–67.
34. Pesapane F, Standaert C, De Visschere P, Villeirs G. T-staging of prostate cancer: identification of useful signs to standardize detection of posterolateral extraprostatic extension on prostate MRI. Clin Imaging 2020;59:1–7.
35. de Rooij M, Hamoen EHJ, Witjes JA, Barentsz JO, Rovers MM. Accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging for local staging of prostate cancer: a diagnostic meta-analysis. Eur Urol 2016;70:233–45.
36. Salerno J, Finelli A, Morash C, Morgan SC, Power N, Schieda N, et al. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging for pre-treatment local staging of prostate cancer: A Cancer Care Ontario clinical practice guideline. Can Urol Assoc J 2016;10:E332.
37. Soylu FN, Eggener S, Oto A. Local staging of prostate cancer with MRI. Diagnostic Interv Radiol 2012;18:365.