Abstract
To clarify the relationship between the probability of prostate cancer scaled using a 5-point Likert system and the biological characteristics of corresponding tumor foci. The present study involved 44 patients undergoing 3.0-Tesla multiparametric MRI before laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Tracing based on pathological and MRI findings was performed. The relationship between the probability of cancer scaled using the 5-point Likert system and the biological characteristics of corresponding tumor foci was evaluated. A total of 102 tumor foci were identified histologically from the 44 specimens. Of the 102 tumors, 55 were assigned a score based on MRI findings (score 1: n = 3; score 2: n = 3; score 3: n = 16; score 4: n = 11 score 5: n = 22), while 47 were not pointed out on MRI. The tracing study revealed that the proportion of >0.5 cm(3) tumors increased according to the upgrade of Likert scores (score 1 or 2: 33%; score 3: 68.8%; score 4 or 5: 90.9%, χ(2) test, p < 0.0001). The proportion with a Gleason score >7 also increased from scale 2 to scale 5 (scale 2: 0%; scale 3: 56.3%; scale 4: 72.7%; 5: 90.9%, χ(2) test, p = 0.0001). On using score 3 or higher as the threshold of cancer detection on MRI, the detection rate mark...Continue Reading
References
Feb 25, 1998·The Journal of Urology·S IkonenS Rannikko
Sep 10, 2004·Academic Radiology·Jacob SosnaNeil M Rofsky
Sep 24, 2004·AJR. American Journal of Roentgenology·Aliya QayyumJohn Kurhanewicz
Aug 16, 2006·Virchows Archiv : an International Journal of Pathology·Sara JonmarkerLars Egevad
Nov 7, 2006·The Journal of Urology·Arnauld VillersLaurent Lemaitre
Sep 21, 2007·Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography·Byung Kwan ParkGhee Young Kwon
Feb 27, 2010·Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging : JMRI·Kazuhiro KitajimaKazuro Sugimura
Mar 17, 2010·European Journal of Radiology·Matthias C RoethkeHeinz-Peter Schlemmer
Jul 20, 2010·European Radiology·Kazuhiro KatahiraYasuyuki Yamashita
Mar 26, 2011·Radiology·Hebert Alberto VargasHedvig Hricak
Sep 29, 2011·The Journal of Urology·Baris TurkbeyPeter A Pinto
Feb 11, 2012·European Radiology·Jelle O BarentszUNKNOWN European Society of Urogenital Radiology
Apr 6, 2012·Yonsei Medical Journal·Bum Soo KimEun Sang Yoo
May 9, 2012·Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging : JMRI·Louise DickinsonMark Emberton
Jun 22, 2013·Radiology·Andrew B RosenkrantzSamir S Taneja
Nov 19, 2013·Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging : JMRI·Baris TurkbeyPeter L Choyke
Aug 2, 2014·World Journal of Urology·Daniel JunkerFriedrich Aigner
Jan 20, 2015·Radiology·Raphaëlle Renard-PennaBernard Malavaud
Feb 26, 2015·AJR. American Journal of Roentgenology·Andrew B RosenkrantzSamir S Taneja
Citations
Feb 24, 2016·World Journal of Urology·Raphaele Renard PennaOlivier Cussenot
Apr 2, 2016·Radiology·Andrew B RosenkrantzDaniel J Margolis
May 21, 2016·Urologic Oncology·Guilherme C MariottiRonaldo H Baroni
Jul 22, 2016·Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging : JMRI·Qing YuanIvan Pedrosa
Jan 21, 2017·Diagnostics·Stephen J Assinder, Vanitha Bhoopalan
Aug 25, 2017·Diagnostics·Heling ZhouRalph P Mason
Sep 5, 2019·Cancers·Sarah FischerMohamed Hamed
Oct 11, 2019·BJU International·Christopher C KhooHashim U Ahmed
Feb 17, 2019·Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging : JMRI·Vincent Stephen EvansDavid Atkinson
Aug 28, 2019·Cancers·Hayley J LuxtonHayley C Whitaker
Apr 24, 2021·Environmental Management·Lekan D OjoLovelin Obi
Oct 8, 2021·Environmental Science and Pollution Research International·Alaba Olasunkanmi OsosanmiAyodeji Emmanuel Oke