PDF herunterladen
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Ann Natl Acad Med Sci 2019; 55(02): 074-083
DOI: 10.1055/s-0039-1694077
Review Article
National Academy of Medical Sciences (India)

Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Prostate: An Update

Savinay Kapur
1   Department of Radiodiagnosis, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Ansari Nagar, New Delhi, India
,
Chandan J. Das
1   Department of Radiodiagnosis, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Ansari Nagar, New Delhi, India
,
Sanjay Sharma
1   Department of Radiodiagnosis, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Ansari Nagar, New Delhi, India
› Institutsangaben
Weitere Informationen

Publikationsverlauf

Publikationsdatum:
02. Oktober 2019 (online)

Auch verfügbar auf
  Lizenzen und Reprints

Abstract

Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mp-MRI) has emerged as an important tool for the detection and characterization of prostatic lesions. It now plays a quintessential role in the surveillance, diagnosis, and staging of prostate cancer (PCa), as well as for the detection of local recurrence. As reliance on serum prostate-specific antigen has declined in the recent times, mp-MRI has emerged as the go-to tool for urologists all over the world. Hence, for the clinician, it has become necessary to be well versed with the technique, image interpretation, and fallacies of mp-MRI. Since mp-MRI has the advantage of better contrast resolution, combining PSMA PET (prostate-specific membrane antigen-positron emission tomography) with MRI could provide additional functional information. However, due to the absence of enough evidence supporting its routine use, mp-MRI still has the unsurpassed role in the initial diagnosis and local staging of PCa.

Keywords

multiparametric MRI - prostate cancer - PIRADS
 

  • References

  • 1 Hariharan K, Padmanabha V. Demography and disease characteristics of prostate cancer in India. Indian J Urol 2016; 32 (02) 103-108
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 2 Verma S, Rajesh A. A clinically relevant approach to imaging prostate cancer: review. Am J Roentgenol 2011; 196 (Suppl. 03) S1-S10
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 3 Weinreb JC, Barentsz JO, Choyke PL. et al. PI-RADS Prostate Imaging-Reporting and Data System: 2015, version 2. Eur Urol 2016; 69 (01) 16-40
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 4 Coakley FV, Hricak H. Radiologic anatomy of the prostate gland: a clinical approach. Radiol Clin North Am 2000; 38 (01) 15-30
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 5 Allen KS, Kressel HY, Arger PH, Pollack HM. Age-related changes of the prostate: evaluation by MR imaging. Am J Roentgenol 1989; 152 (01) 77-81
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 6 Hassanzadeh E, Glazer DI, Dunne RM, Fennessy FM, Harisinghani MG, Tempany CM. Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2 (PI-RADS v2): a pictorial review. Abdom Radiol (NY) 2017; 42 (01) 278-289
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 7 Bonekamp D, Jacobs MA, El-Khouli R, Stoianovici D, Macura KJ. Advancements in MR imaging of the prostate: from diagnosis to interventions. Radiographics 2011; 31 (03) 677-703
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 8 Barentsz JO, Richenberg J, Clements R. et al. European Society of Urogenital Radiology. ESUR prostate MR guidelines 2012. Eur Radiol 2012; 22 (04) 746-757
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 9 Hedgire SS, Eberhardt SC, Borczuk R, McDermott S, Harisinghani MG. Interpretation and reporting multiparametric prostate MRI: a primer for residents and novices. Abdom Imaging 2014; 39 (05) 1036-1051
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 10 Verma S, Turkbey B, Muradyan N. et al. Overview of dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI in prostate cancer diagnosis and management. Am J Roentgenol 2012; 198 (06) 1277-1288
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar