Prostate MRI using an external phased array wearable pelvic coil at 3T: comparison with an endorectal coil

O’Donohoe, Rory L.; Dunne, Ruth; Kimbrell, Vera; Tempany, Clare M.

doi:10.1007/s00261-018-1804-9

Cited by 19 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Analysis of the individual sequences revealed a pooled preference for the FSC in T2WI and for the ERC in DWI. These results are in agreement with the studies by Barth et al [9] and O'Donohoe et al, [13] who compared the quality of T2WI and DWI obtained with an ERC to those acquired using a pelvic phased-array coil or a wearable pelvic coil that seats nearer to the prostate, respectively. In both studies the overall quality was similar for the coils that were compared, but with a tendency for better DWI obtained using the ERC.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

“…These findings may reflect the fact that ERC MR images are generally prone to signal inhomogeneity due to the non-uniform reception profile [11], susceptibility artifacts as a result of the direct interface of soft tissue and air or liquids in the ERC, and anatomical distortion [28]. These observations have been confirmed by several published studies [9,10,13]. Different correction algorithms have been developed to compensate signal inhomogeneity, but these may lead to noise level variation and an increase of acquisition time [11,12,29].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 67%

“…ERCs were previously considered indispensable when patients were scanned using 1.5 T MR scanners. However, several recent studies revealed comparable image quality and similar prostate cancer detection rates with or without ERCs using modern 3 T MR scanners and surface pelvic phased-array receiver coils [10,[12][13][14][15][16][17]. One potential limitation of prior studies is that all radiologists comparing the different coil setups came from the same or closely connected institutions, which may have influenced their quality assessment in favor of the routinely utilized technique in these institutions [9,10,13].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Quality Comparison of 3 Tesla multiparametric MRI of the prostate using a flexible surface receiver coil versus conventional surface coil plus endorectal coil setup

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose To subjectively and quantitatively compare the quality of 3 Tesla magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate acquired with a novel flexible surface coil (FSC) and with a conventional endorectal coil (ERC). Methods Six radiologists independently reviewed 200 pairs of axial, high-resolution T2-weighted and diffusion-weighted image data sets, each containing one examination acquired with the FSC and one with the ERC, respectively. Readers selected their preferred examination from each pair and assessed every single examination using six quality criteria on 4-point scales. Signal-to-noise ratios were measured and compared. Results Two readers preferred FSC acquisition (36.5-45%) over ERC acquisition (13.5-15%) for both sequences combined, and four readers preferred ERC acquisition (41-46%). Analysis of pooled responses for both sequences from all readers shows no significant preference for FSC or ERC. Analysis of the individual sequences revealed a pooled preference for the FSC in T2WI (38.7% vs 17.8%) and for the ERC in DWI (50.9% vs 19.6%). Patients' weight was the only weak predictor of a preference for the ERC acquisition (p = 0.04). SNR and CNR were significantly higher in the ERC acquisitions (p<0.001) except CNR differentiating tumor lesions from benign prostate (p=0.1). Conclusion Although readers have strong individual preferences, comparable subjective image quality can be obtained for prostate MRI with an ERC and the novel FSC. ERC imaging might be particularly valuable for sequences with inherently lower SNR as DWI and larger patients whereas the FSC is generally preferred in T2WI. FSC imaging generates a lower SNR than with an ERC.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 67%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Quality Comparison of 3 Tesla multiparametric MRI of the prostate using a flexible surface receiver coil versus conventional surface coil plus endorectal coil setup

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Explored solutions have included bowel preparation and antispasmotic agents such as glucagon . While use of an endorectal coil for prostate MRI helps to minimize gas within the rectum and decreases distance from coil to the prostate gland, which greatly increases the signal‐to‐noise ratio (SNR), the endorectal coil itself has been shown to cause susceptibility artifact . These methods increase the time involved for patients, physicians, and support staff alike, and introduce patient discomfort.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploratory study of geometric distortion correction of prostate diffusion‐weighted imaging using B₀ map acquisition

Tong

Lemberskiy

Huang

et al. 2019

Magnetic Resonance Imaging

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Evaluation of prostate MRI relies on diffusion‐weighted imaging (DWI), commonly distorted by susceptibility artifacts, thereby creating a need for approaches to correct such distortion. Purpose To compare geometric distortion on prostate MRI between standard DWI and a geometric distortion correction method for DWI described as static distortion correction DWI (SDC DWI). Study Type Retrospective case study. Population Thirty patients (ages 31–81 years) undergoing prostate MRI. Sequence Geometric distortions from echo planar imaging were corrected with the SDC DWI protocol, which first acquires a B0‐field map to estimate geometric distortions. Assessment Contours of the prostate were placed on axial T2‐weighted imaging (T2WI) as an anatomic standard. Pixel shifts and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values were compared between prostate contours applied to the SDC DWI and standard DWI sequences. Detailed characterization of the impact of SDC DWI was performed in three representative patients. Statistical Tests One‐way analysis of variance (ANOVA) test, Spearman correlation test, and Bland–Altman plots were calculated. Results There was significantly greater overlap of the SDC DWI prostate region of interest (ROI) with T2WI than standard DWI with T2WI (10.56 cm2 ± 3.14, P < 0.05). R2 of ADC values from standard DWI vs. SDC DWI in the 30 patients ranged from 0.02–0.94 (mean 0.60). A patient without susceptibility artifact demonstrated minimal pixel shift ranging from 0.6–1.3 mm and high correlation of ADC values (R2 = 0.89) between SDC DWI and standard DWI. A patient with rectal gas showed greater pixel shift (range: –2.5 to –0.5 mm) and less ADC value correlation (R2 = 0.69). A patient with a pelvic phlebolith adjacent to the prostate showed an even greater pixel shift (range: 10–16 mm) and decreased ADC correlation (R2 = 0.21). Data Conclusion SDC DWI appears to correct for susceptibility‐related pixel shifts in the prostate compared with standard DWI, which may have value for assessing prostate lesions obscured by geometric warping. Level of Evidence 4 Technical Efficacy Stage 1 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2019;50:1614–1619.

show abstract

“…The impact of multiparametric MRI has been evaluated in several studies and meta-analyzes. A sensitivity up to 96% and a specificity up to 88% have been re- search before they could be recommended [35].…”

Section: Other Groups Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of Multiparametric MRI of the Prostate: Impact of Standardized Examination Protocols and the Endorectal Coil

Rampoldt¹,

Huebner²,

Zangos³

et al. 2020

OJMI

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: The aim of the present study was to evaluate the patient population, different MRI examination protocols and the patient's acceptance of the endorectal coil in the diagnosis of prostate cancer regarding the current discussion in PI-RADS v2.1. Material and Methods: In our institute, 256 patients were examined with different protocols and separated into six groups. The value of the different MRI protocols was identified by analyzing sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value and positive predictive value. The patient population was tested for statistically significant differences in their characteristics to detect a distortion of the results. The patients' acceptance of endorectal coil was evaluated by a query. Results: In total 4.7% of the patients would not recommend a MRI examination because of subjective physical strain and 65.6% of all patients subjectively saw a benefit in the examination in regard to an optimal diagnostic process. The protocol groups reached a sensitivity from 66.7%-100%, a specificity from 40%-75%, a positive predictive value from 33.3%-80% and a negative predictive value from 66.7%-100%. Conclusion: MRI of the prostate is a safe and comfortable tool with high sensitivity and negative predictive value and the potential of ruling out a clinically significant prostate cancer. However, a general recommendation for the use of biparametric MRI could not be given, considering a higher sensitivity could be performed when using dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI or spectroscopy.

show abstract

Prostate MRI using an external phased array wearable pelvic coil at 3T: comparison with an endorectal coil

Cited by 19 publications

References 25 publications

Quality Comparison of 3 Tesla multiparametric MRI of the prostate using a flexible surface receiver coil versus conventional surface coil plus endorectal coil setup

Quality Comparison of 3 Tesla multiparametric MRI of the prostate using a flexible surface receiver coil versus conventional surface coil plus endorectal coil setup

Exploratory study of geometric distortion correction of prostate diffusion‐weighted imaging using B₀ map acquisition

Evaluation of Multiparametric MRI of the Prostate: Impact of Standardized Examination Protocols and the Endorectal Coil

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Prostate MRI using an external phased array wearable pelvic coil at 3T: comparison with an endorectal coil

Cited by 19 publications

References 25 publications

Quality Comparison of 3 Tesla multiparametric MRI of the prostate using a flexible surface receiver coil versus conventional surface coil plus endorectal coil setup

Quality Comparison of 3 Tesla multiparametric MRI of the prostate using a flexible surface receiver coil versus conventional surface coil plus endorectal coil setup

Exploratory study of geometric distortion correction of prostate diffusion‐weighted imaging using B0 map acquisition

Evaluation of Multiparametric MRI of the Prostate: Impact of Standardized Examination Protocols and the Endorectal Coil

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Exploratory study of geometric distortion correction of prostate diffusion‐weighted imaging using B₀ map acquisition