Diagnostic utility of DTI in prostate cancer.

PURPOSE The aim of this study was to compare the diffusion tensor parameters of prostate cancer, prostatitis and normal prostate tissue. MATERIALS AND METHODS A total of 25 patients with the suspicion of prostate cancer were included in the study. MRI was performed with 3 T system (Intera Achieva, Philips Medical Systems, The Netherlands). T2 TSE and DTI with ss-EPI were obtained in each subject. TRUS-guided prostate biopsy was performed after the MRI examination. Images were analyzed by two radiologists using a special software system. ROI's were drawn according to biopsy zones which are apex, midgland, base and central zone on each sides of the gland. FA and ADC values in areas of cancer, chronic prostatitis and normal prostate tissue were compared using Student's t-test. RESULTS Histopathological analysis revealed carcinoma in 68, chronic prostatitis in 67 and was reported as normal in 65 zones. The mean FA of cancerous tissue was significantly higher (p<0.01) than the FA of chronic prostatitis and normal gland. The mean ADC of cancerous tissue was found to be significantly lower (p<0.01), compared with non-cancerous tissue. CONCLUSION Decreased ADC and increased FA are compatible with the hypercellular nature of prostate tumors. These differences may increase the accuracy of MRI in the detection of carcinoma and to differentiate between cancer and prostatitis.

[1]  H. Hricak,et al.  Imaging of prostate cancer. , 2007, Radiologic clinics of North America.

[2]  E. Merkle,et al.  Short- and midterm reproducibility of apparent diffusion coefficient measurements at 3.0-T diffusion-weighted imaging of the abdomen. , 2009, Radiology.

[3]  T. Helbich,et al.  Diffusion-weighted MR for differentiation of breast lesions at 3.0 T: how does selection of diffusion protocols affect diagnosis? , 2009, Radiology.

[4]  Pratik Mukherjee,et al.  Diffusion tensor imaging and fiber tractography in acute stroke. , 2005, Neuroimaging clinics of North America.

[5]  S. Kyriazi,et al.  Evaluation of the potential of diffusion-weighted imaging in prostate cancer detection , 2007, Acta radiologica.

[6]  Byung Kwan Park,et al.  Update of Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging at 3 T , 2008, Journal of computer assisted tomography.

[7]  Frederik De Keyzer,et al.  Extracranial applications of diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging , 2007, European Radiology.

[8]  K. Taari,et al.  Prostatic MR imaging: Accuracy in differentiating cancer from other prostatic disorders , 2001, Acta radiologica.

[9]  Usha Sinha,et al.  In vivo diffusion tensor imaging of the human prostate , 2004, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[10]  Z. Firat,et al.  Diffusion tensor imaging of the normal prostate at 3 Tesla , 2008, European Radiology.

[11]  Gary P Liney,et al.  Correlation of ADC and T2 Measurements With Cell Density in Prostate Cancer at 3.0 Tesla , 2009, Investigative radiology.

[12]  Thomas Hambrock,et al.  Diffusion and perfusion MR imaging of the prostate. , 2008, Magnetic resonance imaging clinics of North America.

[13]  A. Uluğ,et al.  Diffusion tensor imaging and tractography of median nerve: normative diffusion values. , 2007, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[14]  Guglielmo Manenti,et al.  Diffusion Tensor Magnetic Resonance Imaging of Prostate Cancer , 2007, Investigative radiology.

[15]  N M deSouza,et al.  Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging: a potential non-invasive marker of tumour aggressiveness in localized prostate cancer. , 2008, Clinical radiology.

[16]  A. Hemal,et al.  Magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging: current status in the management of prostate cancer , 2009, BJU international.

[17]  L. Turnbull,et al.  Repeatability of echo-planar-based diffusion measurements of the human prostate at 3 T. , 2007, Magnetic resonance imaging.