Share：
Share this content in WeChat
X
[Chinese][PDF]83267
• RSNA Review Article •
Prostate imaging of Radiological Society of North America 2012: state-of-the-art
LI Liang  FENG Zhao-yan  Yu Jinxiang  Akin Oguz  WANG Liang 

DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1674-8034.2013.03.002.


[Abstract] The ninty-eighth scientific assembly and annual meeting of the Radiological Society of North America (RSNA2012) was held in Chicago, USA. 58 studies of the prostate were published in RSNA2012. Magnetic resonance imaging is predominant imaging modality for the studies. The number of the studies using sonography or PET was relatively smaller. The main focus of the studies was centered on multiply imaging technology combination and optimization in diagnosis and differential diagnosis of prostate cancer. This article is a review of the state-of-the-art prostate imaging in RSNA2012.
[Keywords] Prostate；Magnetic resonance imaging；Ultrasonography；Review literature

LI Liang Department of Radiology, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430030, China

FENG Zhao-yan Department of Radiology, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430030, China

Yu Jinxiang Department of Radiology, Virginia Commonwealth University Health System, Richmond, VA 23298-0615, USA

Akin Oguz Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, Weill Medical College of Cornell University, New York, NY 10021, USA

WANG Liang* Department of Radiology, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430030, China

*Correspondence to: Wang L, E-mail: wangliang_2001@yahoo.com

Conflicts of interest   None.

Received  2013-01-29
Accepted  2013-03-16
DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1674-8034.2013.03.002
DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1674-8034.2013.03.002.

[1]
Turkbey B, Choyke PL. Multiparametric MRI and prostate cancer diagnosis and risk stratification. Curr Opin Urol, 2012, 22(4): 310-315.
[2]
Roy C, Foudi F, Flesch J, et al. Functional magnetic resonance imaging sequences: comparative sensitivities in the detection of local recurrence after radical prostatectomy or radiation therapy for prostate cancer: prospective study. Chicago: RSNA, 2012: DOI: .
[3]
Park SY, Kim CK, Park BK, et al. Comparison between two-point and multi-point analyses for apparent diffusion coefficient measurement in prostate cancer and benign prostate tissue at 3 T: preliminary experience. Chicago: RSNA, 2012: DOI: .
[4]
Elsorogy L, Gaballa G, Elrekhawy M, et al. Role of three-dimensional magnetic resonance spectroscopy in detection of prostatic cancer. Chicago: RSNA, 2012: DOI: .
[5]
Bonekamp D, Bonekamp B, Mullins JK, et al. Multiparametric MRI characterization of prostate lesions in active surveillance population with biopsy correlation and clinical follow-up. Chicago: RSNA, 2012: DOI: .
[6]
Rooij MD, Hamoen EH, Futterer JJ, et al. T2-weighted imaging combined with diffusion weighted imaging and dynamic contrast enhanced-MRI for detection and localization of prostate cancer: a diagnostic Meta-analysis. Chicago: RSNA, 2012: DOI: .
[7]
Itatani Y, Namimoto T, Katahira K, et al. Combined assessment of T2-weighted and diffusion-weighted MR imaging can facilitate triage of risk of prostate cancer: tumor staging and assessment of aggressiveness. Chicago: RSNA, 2012: DOI: .
[8]
Hegde JV, Chen MH, Mulkern RV, et al. Preoperative 3-tesla multiparametric endorectal MRI: a predictive marker for upgrading and upstaging at radical prostatectomy in men with clinically localized prostate cancer. Chicago: RSNA, 2012: DOI: .
[9]
Soylu FN, Peng Y, Jiang Y, et al. Seminal vesicle invasion in prostate cancer: evaluation by multi-parametric endorectal MR imaging. Chicago: RSNA, 2012: DOI: .
[10]
Prasad SM, Drazer MW, Huo D, et al. 2008 US preventive services task force recommendations and prostate cancer screening rates. JAMA, 2012, 307(16): 1692-1694.
[11]
Durmus T, Reichelt U, Huppertz A, et al. Does the number of previous negative biopsies and the taken core quantity affect MR guided prostate biopsy detection rates of prostate cancer? Chicago: RSNA, 2012: DOI: .
[12]
Hoeks CM, Somford R, Christina A, et al. The value of repeat 3T multiparametric MR imaging and MR-guided biopsy in the prostate cancer research international active surveillance (PRIAS) study: initial results at 12 months follow-up. Chicago: RSNA, 2012: DOI: .
[13]
Haider MA, Milot L, Sugar L, et al. US-MRI fused targeted prostate biopsy detects significant cancer in active surveillance patients better than 12 core random biopsy with <4 cores. Chicago: RSNA, 2012: DOI: .
[14]
Barentsz JO, Richenberg J, Clements R, et al. ESUR prostate MR guidelines 2012. Eur Radiol, 2012, 22(4): 746-757.
[15]
Reisaeter LA, Biermann M, Andersen A, et al. Reliability and diagnostic performance using PIRADS in preoperative multiparametric MRI of prostate cancer. Chicago: RSNA, 2012: DOI: .
[16]
Arfi MB, Beuvon F, Schull A, et al. Is the multiparametric MRI ESUR scoring system accurate for diagnosing transition zone prostate cancer? Chicago: RSNA, 2012: DOI: .
[17]
Quentin M, Klasen J, Schimmoeller L, et al. How reliable is scoring for functional prostate MRI? Chicago: RSNA, 2012: DOI: .
[18]
Thomas MA, Nagarajan R, Furuyama J, et al. Compressed sensing for echo-planar J-resolved magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging: pilot findings in prostate cancer. Chicago: RSNA, 2012: DOI: .
[19]
Ueno Y, Kitajima K, Sugimura K, et al. Computed diffusion weighted imaging for the detection of prostate cancer with 3-tesla MRI. Chicago: RSNA, 2012: DOI: .
[20]
Lawrence EM, Priest AN, Barrett T, et al. Analysis of intermediate/high-risk prostate cancer with diffusion kurtosis at 3 T. Chicago: RSNA, 2012: DOI: .
[21]
Zamecnik P, Gaass T, DiplPhys GB. High resolution contrast agent-free MRI for prostate cancer detection. Chicago: RSNA, 2012: DOI: .
[22]
Ghai S, Toi A. Role of transrectal ultrasonography in prostate cancer. Radiol Clin North Am, 2012, 50(6): 1061-1073.
[23]
Barr RG, Correas JM. Shear wave ultrasound elastography of the prostate: initial results. Chicago: RSNA, 2012: DOI: .
[24]
Zhang MB, Tang J, Zhou Y, et al. Elastic modulus of prostatic tissue detected by shear wave sonoelastography and its correlation with international prostate symptom score (IPSS). Chicago: RSNA, 2012: DOI: .
[25]
Folkman J. The vascularization of tumors. Sci Am, 1976, 234(5): 58-64, 70-73.
[26]
Weidner N, Carroll PR, Flax J, et al. Tumor angiogenesis correlates with metastasis in invasive prostate carcinoma. Am J Pathol, 1993, 143(2): 401-409.
[27]
Brawer MK. Quantitative microvessel density: a staging and prognostic marker for human prostatic carcinoma. Cancer, 1996, 78(2): 345-349.
[28]
Borre M, Offersen BV, Nerstrøm B, et al. Microvessel density predicts survival in prostate cancer patients subjected to watchful waiting. Br J Cancer, 1998, 78(7): 940-944.
[29]
Kamel SI, Halpern EJ, Trabulsi EJ, et al. Contrast-enhanced transrectal ultrasound (CE-TRUS) evaluation of the prostate with whole mount prostatectomy correlation. Chicago: RSNA, 2012: DOI: .
[30]
Napoli A, Panebianco V, Anzidei M, et al. Non-invasive treatment of locally nonadvanced prostate cancer: phase I study using magnetic resonance-guided high intensity focused ultrasound technology and excision pathology for efficacy assessment. Chicago: RSNA, 2012: DOI: .
[31]
Perrot TD, Lord M, Pusztaszeri M, et al. Hybrid PET/MRI improves the detection of prostate cancer in the peripheral zone. Chicago: RSNA, 2012: DOI: .
[32]
Eiber MJ, Souvatzoglou M, Holzapfel K, et al. First clinical experience in restaging of patients with recurrent prostate cancer by 11C-Choline-PET/MR: comprehensive diagnostic MR protocol and comparison with 11C-Choline-PET/CT. Chicago: RSNA, 2012: DOI: .
[33]
Zhang X, Xu J, Li JY, et al. Dual energy spectral CT imaging for the differentiation of prostatic carcinoma from benign prostatic hyperplasia: a pilot study. Chicago: RSNA, 2012: DOI: .
[34]
Zhang ZW, Hallac RR, Peschke P, et al. Noninvasive tumor oxygen partial pressure (pO2) measurement using quantitative 1H MRI multiparametric m aps in rat prostate cancer models. Chicago: RSNA, 2012: DOI: .
[35]
Bravo SM, Myers C, Bravo TC, et al. Ferumoxytol as a lymph node contrast agent in patients with metastatic prostate carcinoma: rad-path correlation. Chicago: RSNA, 2012: DOI: .
[36]
Osmundson EC, Hristov D, Chin RK, et al. Evaluation of metal artifact reduction in prostate cancer radiotherapy treatment planning. Chicago: RSNA, 2012: DOI: .
[37]
Dabjan MB, Jawad MS, Shah C, et al. Comparison of clinical outcomes following definitive prostate radiotherapy by ethnicity. Chicago: RSNA, 2012: DOI: .
[38]
Doi H, Ishimaru F, Tanooka M, et al. Higher body mass index may suppress the incidence of gastrointestinal toxicity induced by external beam radiation therapy for prostate cancer. Chicago: RSNA, 2012: DOI: .
[39]
Hartsell WF, Abruscato L, Chang JH, et al. Feasibility analysis phase III trial of hypo-fractionated vs. high dose proton radiation for low risk prostate cancer patients: PCG GU002-10. Chicago: RSNA, 2012: DOI: .

PREV The progress of head and neck radiology on Radiological Society of North America 2012
NEXT Research progress on joint image of Radiological Society of North America 2012
  


LINK


Tel & Fax: +8610-67113815    E-mail: editor@cjmri.cn