Comparison of Clinical Value of Transrectal Ultrasound, Contrast-enhanced Ultrasonography and Dynamic Contrast Material-enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Detecting Prostate Carcinoma

Diliyaer·Tuerhong; Hamulati·Tusong; Asimujiang ·Abula; WANG Yujie

doi:10.3971/j.issn.1000-8578.2015.09.012

Cancer Research on Prevention and Treatment > 2015 > 42(09): 915-919. > DOI: 10.3971/j.issn.1000-8578.2015.09.012

Diliyaer·Tuerhong, Hamulati·Tusong, Asimujiang ·Abula, WANG Yujie. Comparison of Clinical Value of Transrectal Ultrasound, Contrast-enhanced Ultrasonography and Dynamic Contrast Material-enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Detecting Prostate Carcinoma[J]. Cancer Research on Prevention and Treatment, 2015, 42(09): 915-919. DOI: 10.3971/j.issn.1000-8578.2015.09.012

Citation:

PDF (3550 KB)

Comparison of Clinical Value of Transrectal Ultrasound, Contrast-enhanced Ultrasonography and Dynamic Contrast Material-enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Detecting Prostate Carcinoma

Department of Urology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Xinjiang Medical University, Urumqi 830054, China

More Information

Received Date: September 25, 2014
Revised Date: March 19, 2015

Graphical Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Objective To compare the clinical value of transrectal ultrasound(TRUS), contrast-enhanced ultrasonography(CEUS) and dynamic contrast material-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging(DCE-MRI) for detecting prostate carcinoma. Methods Sixty-three patients were suspected clinically of prostate carcinoma and underwent systematic biopsy further. We retrospectively analyzed the relative test data of TRUS, CEUS and DCE-MRI before operation. The pathological results of biopsy were performed to evaluate the diagnostic value of TRUS, CEUS and DCE-MRI. Results In diagnosing prostate carcinoma, the sensitivity, specificity and accurate rates were 48.84%, 60% and 52.38% with TRUS, 74.42%, 65% and 71.43% with CEUS and 69.77%, 85% and 74.60% with DCE-MRI, retrospectively(P>0.05). Area under ROC curves of TRUS, CEUS, DCE-MRI were 0.550, 0.723, 0.781, and DCE-MRI had the highest sensitivity and accuracy. Conclusion The screening for patients suspected of prostate carcinoma, CEUS and DCE-MRI have higher accuracy than TRUS. The sensitivity and accuracy of DCE-MRI are the highest.

FullText(HTML)

References (17)

References

[1]	Jemal A, Bray F, Center MM, et al. Global cancer statistics[J]. CA Cancer J Clin, 2011, 61(2): 69-90.
[2]	Center MM, Jemal A, Lortet-Tieulent J, et al. Variation in prostate cancer incidence and mortality rates[J]. Eur Urol, 2012, 61(6): 10 79-92.
[3]	Beerlage HP, Aarnink RG, Ruijter ET, et al. Correlation of transrectal ultrasound, computer analysis of transrectal ultrasound and histopathology of radical prostatectomy specimen[J]. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis, 2001, 4(1): 56-62.
[4]	Rifkin MD, Dahnert W, Kurtz AB. State of the art: endorectal sonography of the prostate gland[J]. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 1990, 15 4(4): 691-700.
[5]	Shinohara K, Wheeler TM, Scardino PT. The appearance of prostate cancer on transrectal ultrasonography: correlation of imaging and pathological examinations[J]. J Urol, 1989, 142(1): 76 -82.
[6]	Delongchamps NB, de la Roza G, Jones R, et al. Saturation biopsies on autopsied prostates for detecting and characterizing prostate cancer[J]. BJU Int, 2009, 103(1): 49-54.
[7]	Sedelaar JP, van Leenders GJ, Hulsbergen-van de Kaa CA, et al.Microvessel density: correlation between contrast ultrasonography and histology of prostate cancer[J]. Eur Urol, 2001, 40(3): 285-93.
[8]	Strohmeyer D, Frauscher F, Klauser A, et al. Contrast-enhanced transrectal color doppler ultrasonography (TRCDUS) for assessment of angiogenesis in prostate cancer[J]. Anticancer Res, 20 01, 21(4B): 2907-13.
[9]	Goldberg BB, Liu JB, Forsberg F. Ultrasound contrast agents: a review[J]. Ultrasound Med Biol, 1994, 20(4): 319-33.
[10]	Goldberg BB, Raichlen JS, Forsberg F. Ultrasound contrast agents: basic principles and clinical applications[M]. 2nd edition. London: Martin Dunitz, 2001.
[11]	Xie SW, Li HL, Du J, et al. Contrast-enhanced ultrasonography with contrast-tuned imaging technology for the detection of prostate cancer: comparisonwith conventional ultrasonography[J]. BJU Int, 2012, 109(11): 1620-6.
[12]	Seitz M, Gratzke C, Schlenker B, et al. Contrast-enhanced transrectal ultrasound (CE-TRUS) with cadence-contrast pulse sequence (CPS) technology for the identification of prostate cancer[J]. Urol Oncol, 2011, 29(3): 295-301.
[13]	Buckley DL, Roberts C, Parker GJ, et al. Prostate cancer: Evaluation of vascular characteristics with dynamic contrastenhanced Tl-weighted MR imaging,initial experience[J]. Radiology, 2004, 233(3): 709-15.
[14]	Qiao FL, Yuan JJ, Liu Y, et al. Appliaction value of transrectal ultrasound combined with magnetic resonance imaging in prostate disease[J]. Zhongguo Lao Nian Yi Xue Za Zhi, 2010, 30(9): 11 98-9. [乔峰利, 袁建军, 刘烨, 等. 经直肠超声联合核磁共振成像在前列腺疾病诊断中的应用价值[J]. 中国老年医学杂志, 20 10, 30(9): 1198 -9.]
[15]	Wang XY, Liao MZ, Nong MF, et al. Characteristic of ultrasonography of transrectal and color doppler for diagnosing prostate carcimoma[J]. Zhong Liu Fang Zhi Yan Jiu, 2010, 37(6): 69 6-8. [王小燕, 廖明珠, 农美芬, 等. 前列腺癌径直肠超声及彩色多普勒特征探讨[J]. 肿瘤防治研究, 2010, 37(6): 696-8.]
[16]	Zhao LX, Wu R, Xu G, et al. Comparison of contrast-enhanced ulturasonography with dynamic contrast material-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging for prostate cancer detection[J]. Zhonghua Lin Chuang Yi Shi Za Zhi(Dian Zi Ban), 2013,7(21): 94 53-7. [赵丽霞, 吴蓉, 徐光, 等. 超声造影与磁共振动态增强成像对前列腺癌的诊断价值比较[J]. 中华临床医师杂志（电子版） , 2013, 7(21): 9453-7.]
[17]	Aigner F, Pallwein L, Schocke M, et al. Comparison of realtime sonoelastography with T2-weighted endorectal magnetic resonance imaging for prostate cancer detection[J]. J Ultrasound Med, 2011, 30(5): 643-9.

[1]	LIU Guichao, HU Xuefeng, ZHAO Hai, HE Xiaohong, TENG Jianjian, GUO Jiangui, WU Haijun. Diffusion-weighted Magnetic Resonance Imaging Evaluates Salivary Gland Function Damage in Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma Patients Treated with Intensity-modulated Radiation Therapy[J]. Cancer Research on Prevention and Treatment, 2019, 46(10): 905-910. DOI: 10.3971/j.issn.1000-8578.2019.19.0367
[2]	ZHAO Miao, ZHAO Yun, ZHOU Jun. Application Perspectives of Targeted Ultrasound Contrast Agents in Diagnosis and Therapy of Cancer[J]. Cancer Research on Prevention and Treatment, 2017, 44(5): 360-364. DOI: 10.3971/j.issn.1000-8578.2017.05.010
[3]	WU Zhenghua, ZHOU Aiyun, ZHANG Cheng, XIAO Fan. Comparison of Application Value of Contrast Enhanced Ultrasound and Acoustic Radiation Force Impulse Imaging in Differential Diagnosis of Benign and Malignant Renal Tumors[J]. Cancer Research on Prevention and Treatment, 2016, 43(12): 1063-1066. DOI: 10.3971/j.issn.1000-8578.2016.12.011
[4]	WANG Shu, NI Qing. Accuracy of Mammography, Color Doppler Ultrasonography and Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Predicting Ductal Carcinoma in Situ[J]. Cancer Research on Prevention and Treatment, 2015, 42(06): 597-600. DOI: 10.3971/j.issn.1000-8578.2015.06.014
[5]	HUANG Yecai, QI Yunxiang, REN Jing, FAN Xigang, YANG Xuegang, LI Zhiru, LANG Jinyi. Diagnostic Value of MRI in Detection of Small Lymph Node Metastasis and Its Effects on Radiotherapy Target Volume Design in Cervical Cancer Patients[J]. Cancer Research on Prevention and Treatment, 2014, 41(08): 920-924. DOI: 10.3971/j.issn.1000-8578.2014.08.014
[6]	YANG Li, SHI Gaofeng, LIU Hui, ZHOU Tao. Correlation on MRI Features and HER-2 Expression of Breast Cancer[J]. Cancer Research on Prevention and Treatment, 2013, 40(11): 1070-1073. DOI: 10.3971/j.issn.1000-8578.2013.11.013
[7]	SHI Jian-bing, OU Hua-lin, CHEN Xi-zhong, MA Hai-yan, LI Ming, HE Yun, LI Zhi-xian. Characteristics and Quantitative Analysis of Renal Hamartoma with Real-time Contrast-enhanced Ultrasonography[J]. Cancer Research on Prevention and Treatment, 2011, 38(01): 80-82. DOI: 10.3971/j.issn.1000-8578.2011.01.023
[8]	WANG Xiao-yan, LIAO Ming-zhu, NONG Mei-fen, DONG Xiao-yuan, WEI Hai-ming. Characteristic of Ultrasonography of Transrectal and Color Doppler for Diagnosing Prostate Carcinoma[J]. Cancer Research on Prevention and Treatment, 2010, 37(06): 696-698. DOI: 10.3971/j.issn.1000-8578.2010.06.024
[9]	XU Li-ying, KONG Xiang-quan, XU Hai-bo, LIU Ding-xi, YU Qun, XIONG Yin. The Diagnosis of Dynamic Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Early Breast Cancer[J]. Cancer Research on Prevention and Treatment, 2004, 31(10): 617-618. DOI: 10.3971/j.issn.1000-8578.2565
[10]	XU Li-ying, KONG Xiang-quan, XU Hai-bo, LIU Ding-xi, YU Qun, ZENG Jun. The Diagnostic Value of Dynamic Enhanced MR Imaging for Special Types of Breast Cancer[J]. Cancer Research on Prevention and Treatment, 2004, 31(10): 611-613. DOI: 10.3971/j.issn.1000-8578.2567

Cited By

Get Citation

PDF

XML

Article views (1075) PDF downloads (593)

Turn off MathJax

Article Contents

Abstract

References

Comparison of Clinical Value of Transrectal Ultrasound, Contrast-enhanced Ultrasonography and Dynamic Contrast Material-enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Detecting Prostate Carcinoma

Abstract

References

Related Articles

Catalog

Download Center

Links

Contact Us

Comparison of Clinical Value of Transrectal Ultrasound, Contrast-enhanced Ultrasonography and Dynamic Contrast Material-enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Detecting Prostate Carcinoma

Abstract

References

Related Articles

Catalog

Download Center

Links

Contact Us

Export File

Citation

Format

Content