Urogenital

European Radiology

, Volume 19, Issue 3, pp 761-769

First online:

Endorectal magnetic resonance imaging at 1.5 Tesla to assess local recurrence following radical prostatectomy using T2-weighted and contrast-enhanced imaging

  • Stefano CirilloAffiliated withUnit of Radiology, Institute for Cancer Research and Treatment Email author 
  • , Massimo PetracchiniAffiliated withUnit of Radiology, Institute for Cancer Research and Treatment
  • , Lorenza ScottiAffiliated withDepartment of Statistic, University of Milano—Bicocca
  • , Teresa GalloAffiliated withUnit of Radiology, Institute for Cancer Research and Treatment
  • , Annalisa MaceraAffiliated withUnit of Radiology, Institute for Cancer Research and Treatment
  • , Maria Cristina BonaAffiliated withUnit of Radiotheraphy, Institute for Cancer Research and Treatment
  • , Cinzia OrtegaAffiliated withUnit of Oncology, Institute for Cancer Research and Treatment
  • , Pietro GabrieleAffiliated withUnit of Radiotheraphy, Institute for Cancer Research and Treatment
  • , Daniele ReggeAffiliated withUnit of Radiology, Institute for Cancer Research and Treatment

Rent the article at a discount

Rent now

* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.

Get Access

Abstract

To evaluate diagnostic performance of endorectal magnetic resonance (eMR) for diagnosing local recurrence of prostate cancer (PC) in patients with previous radical prostatectomy (RP) and to assess whether contrast-enhanced (CE)-eMR improved diagnostic accuracy in comparison to unenhanced study. Unenhanced eMR data of 72 male patients (mean of total PSA: 1.23 ± 1.3 ng/ml) with previous RP were interpreted retrospectively and classified either as normal or suspicious for local recurrence. All eMR examinations were re-evaluated also on CE-eMR 4 months after the first reading. Images were acquired on a 1.5-T system. These data were compared to the standard of reference for local recurrence: prostatectomy bed biopsy results; choline positron emission tomography results; PSA reduction or increase after pelvic radiotherapy; PSA modification during active surveillance. Sensitivity, specificity, predictive positive value, negative predictive value and accuracy were 61.4%, 82.1%, 84.4%, 57.5% and 69.4% for unenhanced eMR and 84.1%, 89.3%, 92.5%, 78.1% and 86.1% for CE-eMR. A statistically significant difference was found between accuracy and sensitivity of the two evaluations (χ2 = 5.33; p = 0.02 and χ2 = 9.00; p = 0.0027). EMR had great accuracy for visualizing local recurrence of PC after RP. CE-eMR improved diagnostic performance in comparison with T2-weighted imaging alone.

Keywords

Magnetic resonance imaging Prostatic neoplasm Prostatectomy Local neoplasm recurrence Contrast media