Browse > Article

Value of Diffusion Tensor Imaging of Prostate Cancer: Comparison with Systemic Prostate Biopsy  

Yoon, Seong-Kuk (Department of Radiology, Dong-A University, Medical Center)
Kim, Dong-Won (Department of Radiology, Dong-A University, Medical Center)
Ha, Dong-Ho (Department of Radiology, Dong-A University, Medical Center)
Kwon, Hee-Jin (Department of Radiology, Dong-A University, Medical Center)
Kang, Myong-Jin (Department of Radiology, Dong-A University, Medical Center)
Choi, Sun-Seob (Department of Radiology, Dong-A University, Medical Center)
Nam, Kyung-Jin (Department of Radiology, Dong-A University, Medical Center)
Kim, Jung-Il (Department of Occupational Medicine, Dong-A University, Medical Center)
Publication Information
Journal of the Korean Society of Radiology / v.64, no.2, 2011 , pp. 179-184 More about this Journal
Abstract
Purpose: This study was performed to evaluate the usefulness of diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) and to correlate systemic twelve biopsy in prostate cancer. Materials and Methods: Thirty-one patients with suspected prostate cancer underwent MR imaging. DTI was performed prior to a prostate biopsy. We prospectively calculated the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) and fractional anisotropy (FA) value in each corresponding biopsy site. Results: Twenty-three of 31 patients had histopathologically proven adenocarcinoma. Among the 276 biopsy cores of 23 patients with prostate cancer, 109 cores showed positive results (39%). The ADC and FA value of positive cores were $1.31{\pm}0.34{\times}10^{-3}mm^{2}/s$ and $0.68{\pm}0.07$, and those of the negative cores were $1.74{\pm}0.45{\times}10^{-3}mm^{2}/s$ and $0.54{\pm}0.09$, respectively. Eight patients without carcinoma showed an ADC value of $1.83{\pm}0.26{\times}10^{-3}mm^{2}/s$ and an FA value of $0.47{\pm}0.07$. The ADC and FA value of positive cores were significantly lower and higher than those of negative cores and cancer-free patients, respectively (p < 0.05). Conclusion: The ADC and FA values using DTI may provide useful diagnostic information in the differentiation of cancerous tissues, although there is overlap in some cases.
Keywords
Prostate; Prostate Neoplasms; Magnetic Resonance Imaging; Diffusion Magnetic Resonance Imaging; Diffusion Tensor Imaging;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 Sundgren PC, Dong Q, Gomez-Hassan D, Mukherji SK, Maly P, Welsh R. Diffusion tensor imaging of the brain: review of clinical applications. Neuroradiology 2004;46:339-350   DOI   ScienceOn
2 Yang Q, Tress BM, Barber PA, Desmond PM, Darby DG, Gerraty RP, et al. Serial study of apparent diffusion coefficient and anisotropy in patients with acute stroke. Stoke 1999;30:2382-2390
3 Sato C, Naganawa S, Nakamura T, Kumada H, Miura S, Takizawa O, et al. Differentiation of noncancerous tissue and cancer lesions by apparent diffusion coefficient values in transition and peripheral zones of the prostate. J Magn Reson Imaging 2005;21:258-262   DOI   ScienceOn
4 Kozlowski P, Chang SD, Jones EC, Berean KW, Chen H, Goldenberg SL. Combined diffusion-weighted and dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI for prostate cancer diagnosis-correlation with biopsy and histopathology. J Magn Reson Imaging 2006;24:108-113   DOI   ScienceOn
5 Haider MA, van der Kwast TH, Tanguay J, Evans AJ, Hashmi AT, Lockwood G, et al. Combined T2-weighted and diffusion-weighted MRI for localization of prostate cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2007;189:323-328   DOI   ScienceOn
6 Tanimoto A, Nakashima J, Kohno H, Shinmoto H, Kuribayashi S. Prostate cancer screening: the clinical value of diffusion-weighted imaging and dynamic MR imaging in combination with T2-weighted imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging 2007;25:146-152   DOI   ScienceOn
7 Tamada T, Sone T, Jo Y, Toshimitsu S, Yamashita T, Yamamoto A, et al. Apparent diffusion coefficient values in peripheral and transition zones of the prostate: comparison between normal and malignant prostatic tissues and correlation with histologic grade. J Magn Reson Imaging 2008;28:720-726   DOI   ScienceOn
8 Kim JH, Kim JK, Park BW, Kim N, Cho KS. Apparent diffusion coefficient: prostate cancer versus noncancerous tissue according to anatomical region. J Magn Reson Imaging 2008;28:1173-1179   DOI   ScienceOn
9 Sinha S, Sinha U. In vivo diffusion tensor imaging of the human prostate. Magn Reson Med 2004;52:530-537   DOI   ScienceOn
10 Le Bihan D, Mangin JF, Poupon C, Clark CA, Pappata S, Molko N, et al. Diffusion tensor imaging: concepts and applications. J Magn Reson Imaging 2001;13:534-546   DOI   ScienceOn
11 Gibbs P, Tozer DJ, Liney GP, Turnbull LW. Comparison of quantitative T2 mapping and diffusion-weighted imaging in the normal and pathologic prostate. Magn Reson Med 2001;46:1054-1058   DOI   ScienceOn
12 Hoehn-Berlage M, Eis M, Schmitz B. Regional and directional anisotropy of apparent diffusion coefficient in rat brain. NMR Biomed 1999;12:45-50   DOI   ScienceOn
13 Tamada T, Sone T, Toshimitsu S, Imai S, Jo Y, Yoshida K, et al. Age-related and zonal anatomical changes of apparent diffusion coefficient values in normal human prostatic tissues. J Magn Reson Imaging 2008;27:552-556   DOI   ScienceOn