File Download
There are no files associated with this item.
Links for fulltext
(May Require Subscription)
- Publisher Website: 10.1002/jmri.22157
- Scopus: eid_2-s2.0-77951523556
- PMID: 20432351
- WOS: WOS:000277397100015
- Find via
Supplementary
- Citations:
- Appears in Collections:
Article: Preoperative detection of prostate cancer: A comparison with 11C-choline PET, 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose PET and MR imaging
Title | Preoperative detection of prostate cancer: A comparison with <sup>11</sup>C-choline PET, <sup>18</sup>F-fluorodeoxyglucose PET and MR imaging |
---|---|
Authors | |
Keywords | Choline Fluorodeoxyglucose MRI Positron-emission tomography Prostatic neoplasms |
Issue Date | 2010 |
Citation | Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging, 2010, v. 31, n. 5, p. 1151-1156 How to Cite? |
Abstract | Purpose: To compare 11C-choline positron emission tomography (C-PET), 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose PET (FDG-PET), and MR imaging in the preoperative detection of prostate cancer. Materials and Methods: C-PET, FDG-PET, and MR images were obtained in 43 consecutive patients with suspected prostate cancer, and prostate cancers were histopathologically confirmed in 26 patients. Unenhanced T1-weighted, T2-weighted, and gadolinium-enhanced MR images were obtained. C-PET and FDG-PET were conducted 1.5 and 60 minutes after injection of 5.5 and 5.0 MBq/kg tracers, respectively. A nuclear and a genitourinary radiologist retrospectively reviewed PET and MR images at random, respectively, and assigned a confidence level for the presence of prostate cancer using a four-point scale. Diagnostic performance was tested using the McNemar test and receiver operating characteristic curve analysis. Results: The sensitivity was greater (P < 0.05) with MR (88%) and C-PET (73%) images than with FDG-PET images (31%). The accuracy was greater (P < 0.05) with MR images (88%) than with C-PET (67%) and FDG-PET (53%) images. The area-under-curve value with MR (0.90) was greater than those with C-PET (0.53) and FDG-PET (0.54) images (P < 0.01). Conclusion: MR imaging should be primarily performed in the preoperative detection of prostate cancer. C-PET and FDG-PET did not improve the detection. © 2010 Wiley-Liss, Inc. |
Persistent Identifier | http://hdl.handle.net/10722/316035 |
ISSN | 2023 Impact Factor: 3.3 2023 SCImago Journal Rankings: 1.339 |
ISI Accession Number ID |
DC Field | Value | Language |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.author | Watanabe, Haruo | - |
dc.contributor.author | Kanematsu, Masayuki | - |
dc.contributor.author | Kondo, Hiroshi | - |
dc.contributor.author | Kako, Nobuo | - |
dc.contributor.author | Yamamoto, Naoki | - |
dc.contributor.author | Yamada, Toru | - |
dc.contributor.author | Goshima, Satoshi | - |
dc.contributor.author | Hoshi, Hiroaki | - |
dc.contributor.author | Bae, Kyongtae T. | - |
dc.date.accessioned | 2022-08-24T15:49:01Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2022-08-24T15:49:01Z | - |
dc.date.issued | 2010 | - |
dc.identifier.citation | Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging, 2010, v. 31, n. 5, p. 1151-1156 | - |
dc.identifier.issn | 1053-1807 | - |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10722/316035 | - |
dc.description.abstract | Purpose: To compare 11C-choline positron emission tomography (C-PET), 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose PET (FDG-PET), and MR imaging in the preoperative detection of prostate cancer. Materials and Methods: C-PET, FDG-PET, and MR images were obtained in 43 consecutive patients with suspected prostate cancer, and prostate cancers were histopathologically confirmed in 26 patients. Unenhanced T1-weighted, T2-weighted, and gadolinium-enhanced MR images were obtained. C-PET and FDG-PET were conducted 1.5 and 60 minutes after injection of 5.5 and 5.0 MBq/kg tracers, respectively. A nuclear and a genitourinary radiologist retrospectively reviewed PET and MR images at random, respectively, and assigned a confidence level for the presence of prostate cancer using a four-point scale. Diagnostic performance was tested using the McNemar test and receiver operating characteristic curve analysis. Results: The sensitivity was greater (P < 0.05) with MR (88%) and C-PET (73%) images than with FDG-PET images (31%). The accuracy was greater (P < 0.05) with MR images (88%) than with C-PET (67%) and FDG-PET (53%) images. The area-under-curve value with MR (0.90) was greater than those with C-PET (0.53) and FDG-PET (0.54) images (P < 0.01). Conclusion: MR imaging should be primarily performed in the preoperative detection of prostate cancer. C-PET and FDG-PET did not improve the detection. © 2010 Wiley-Liss, Inc. | - |
dc.language | eng | - |
dc.relation.ispartof | Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging | - |
dc.subject | Choline | - |
dc.subject | Fluorodeoxyglucose | - |
dc.subject | MRI | - |
dc.subject | Positron-emission tomography | - |
dc.subject | Prostatic neoplasms | - |
dc.title | Preoperative detection of prostate cancer: A comparison with <sup>11</sup>C-choline PET, <sup>18</sup>F-fluorodeoxyglucose PET and MR imaging | - |
dc.type | Article | - |
dc.description.nature | link_to_subscribed_fulltext | - |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1002/jmri.22157 | - |
dc.identifier.pmid | 20432351 | - |
dc.identifier.scopus | eid_2-s2.0-77951523556 | - |
dc.identifier.volume | 31 | - |
dc.identifier.issue | 5 | - |
dc.identifier.spage | 1151 | - |
dc.identifier.epage | 1156 | - |
dc.identifier.eissn | 1522-2586 | - |
dc.identifier.isi | WOS:000277397100015 | - |