Topographical sensitivity and specificity of endorectal coil magnetic resonance imaging for prostate cancer detection

Daniela Colleselli, David Schilling, Matthias P. Lichy, Jörg Hennenlotter, Ulrich H. Vogel, Stephan A. Krueger, Ursula Kuehs, Heinz Peter Schlemmer, Arnulf Stenzl, Christian Schwentner

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

14 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objectives: Endorectal coil magnetic resonance imaging (EC-MRI) is useful to evaluate prostate cancer localization. Herein, we evaluate sensitivity and specificity of EC-MRI in different regions of the prostate by comparing the acquired images to whole-mount sections of the prostate after radical prostatectomy. Methods: 69 patients with localized prostate cancer were included. After virtually dividing the prostate into 12 sectors, results of EC-MRI were compared to corresponding whole-mount sections by contingency analysis. Sensitivity and specificity were calculated for each of the 12 areas as well as for the dorsal and ventral region. Results: Sensitivity right/left was dorsal apex/mid/base 41/41, 60/67 and 73/79%; ventral 33/52, 43/42 and 47/52%. Specificity right/left was dorsal apex/mid/base 92/89, 82/75 and 88/69%; ventral 100/100, 100/92 and 88/83%. Local sensitivity and specificity regarding dorsal versus ventral was 88/100 and 65/87%. Conclusions: Local sensitivity decreased from basodorsal to apicoventral direction, whereas local specificity increased in the same direction. Therefore, prostate cancers demonstrated by MRI are more prone to be detected in the basodorsal region, whereas less false-positive results are found in the apicoventral region. These variations in topographical specificity and sensitivity need to be considered before radical prostatectomy or MRI-guided biopsy.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)388-394
Number of pages7
JournalUrologia Internationalis
Volume84
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - May 1 2010

Fingerprint

Prostatic Neoplasms
Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Prostate
Sensitivity and Specificity
Prostatectomy
Biopsy
Direction compound

Keywords

  • Endorectal coil
  • Endorectal coil magnetic resonance imaging, sensitivity and specificity
  • Local staging
  • Magnetic resonance imaging
  • Radical prostatectomy

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Urology

Cite this

Colleselli, D., Schilling, D., Lichy, M. P., Hennenlotter, J., Vogel, U. H., Krueger, S. A., ... Schwentner, C. (2010). Topographical sensitivity and specificity of endorectal coil magnetic resonance imaging for prostate cancer detection. Urologia Internationalis, 84(4), 388-394. https://doi.org/10.1159/000300572

Topographical sensitivity and specificity of endorectal coil magnetic resonance imaging for prostate cancer detection. / Colleselli, Daniela; Schilling, David; Lichy, Matthias P.; Hennenlotter, Jörg; Vogel, Ulrich H.; Krueger, Stephan A.; Kuehs, Ursula; Schlemmer, Heinz Peter; Stenzl, Arnulf; Schwentner, Christian.

In: Urologia Internationalis, Vol. 84, No. 4, 01.05.2010, p. 388-394.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Colleselli, D, Schilling, D, Lichy, MP, Hennenlotter, J, Vogel, UH, Krueger, SA, Kuehs, U, Schlemmer, HP, Stenzl, A & Schwentner, C 2010, 'Topographical sensitivity and specificity of endorectal coil magnetic resonance imaging for prostate cancer detection', Urologia Internationalis, vol. 84, no. 4, pp. 388-394. https://doi.org/10.1159/000300572
Colleselli, Daniela ; Schilling, David ; Lichy, Matthias P. ; Hennenlotter, Jörg ; Vogel, Ulrich H. ; Krueger, Stephan A. ; Kuehs, Ursula ; Schlemmer, Heinz Peter ; Stenzl, Arnulf ; Schwentner, Christian. / Topographical sensitivity and specificity of endorectal coil magnetic resonance imaging for prostate cancer detection. In: Urologia Internationalis. 2010 ; Vol. 84, No. 4. pp. 388-394.
@article{565ee2d8326044309781f80d7342c2a9,
title = "Topographical sensitivity and specificity of endorectal coil magnetic resonance imaging for prostate cancer detection",
abstract = "Objectives: Endorectal coil magnetic resonance imaging (EC-MRI) is useful to evaluate prostate cancer localization. Herein, we evaluate sensitivity and specificity of EC-MRI in different regions of the prostate by comparing the acquired images to whole-mount sections of the prostate after radical prostatectomy. Methods: 69 patients with localized prostate cancer were included. After virtually dividing the prostate into 12 sectors, results of EC-MRI were compared to corresponding whole-mount sections by contingency analysis. Sensitivity and specificity were calculated for each of the 12 areas as well as for the dorsal and ventral region. Results: Sensitivity right/left was dorsal apex/mid/base 41/41, 60/67 and 73/79{\%}; ventral 33/52, 43/42 and 47/52{\%}. Specificity right/left was dorsal apex/mid/base 92/89, 82/75 and 88/69{\%}; ventral 100/100, 100/92 and 88/83{\%}. Local sensitivity and specificity regarding dorsal versus ventral was 88/100 and 65/87{\%}. Conclusions: Local sensitivity decreased from basodorsal to apicoventral direction, whereas local specificity increased in the same direction. Therefore, prostate cancers demonstrated by MRI are more prone to be detected in the basodorsal region, whereas less false-positive results are found in the apicoventral region. These variations in topographical specificity and sensitivity need to be considered before radical prostatectomy or MRI-guided biopsy.",
keywords = "Endorectal coil, Endorectal coil magnetic resonance imaging, sensitivity and specificity, Local staging, Magnetic resonance imaging, Radical prostatectomy",
author = "Daniela Colleselli and David Schilling and Lichy, {Matthias P.} and J{\"o}rg Hennenlotter and Vogel, {Ulrich H.} and Krueger, {Stephan A.} and Ursula Kuehs and Schlemmer, {Heinz Peter} and Arnulf Stenzl and Christian Schwentner",
year = "2010",
month = "5",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1159/000300572",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "84",
pages = "388--394",
journal = "Urologia Internationalis",
issn = "0042-1138",
publisher = "S. Karger AG",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Topographical sensitivity and specificity of endorectal coil magnetic resonance imaging for prostate cancer detection

AU - Colleselli, Daniela

AU - Schilling, David

AU - Lichy, Matthias P.

AU - Hennenlotter, Jörg

AU - Vogel, Ulrich H.

AU - Krueger, Stephan A.

AU - Kuehs, Ursula

AU - Schlemmer, Heinz Peter

AU - Stenzl, Arnulf

AU - Schwentner, Christian

PY - 2010/5/1

Y1 - 2010/5/1

N2 - Objectives: Endorectal coil magnetic resonance imaging (EC-MRI) is useful to evaluate prostate cancer localization. Herein, we evaluate sensitivity and specificity of EC-MRI in different regions of the prostate by comparing the acquired images to whole-mount sections of the prostate after radical prostatectomy. Methods: 69 patients with localized prostate cancer were included. After virtually dividing the prostate into 12 sectors, results of EC-MRI were compared to corresponding whole-mount sections by contingency analysis. Sensitivity and specificity were calculated for each of the 12 areas as well as for the dorsal and ventral region. Results: Sensitivity right/left was dorsal apex/mid/base 41/41, 60/67 and 73/79%; ventral 33/52, 43/42 and 47/52%. Specificity right/left was dorsal apex/mid/base 92/89, 82/75 and 88/69%; ventral 100/100, 100/92 and 88/83%. Local sensitivity and specificity regarding dorsal versus ventral was 88/100 and 65/87%. Conclusions: Local sensitivity decreased from basodorsal to apicoventral direction, whereas local specificity increased in the same direction. Therefore, prostate cancers demonstrated by MRI are more prone to be detected in the basodorsal region, whereas less false-positive results are found in the apicoventral region. These variations in topographical specificity and sensitivity need to be considered before radical prostatectomy or MRI-guided biopsy.

AB - Objectives: Endorectal coil magnetic resonance imaging (EC-MRI) is useful to evaluate prostate cancer localization. Herein, we evaluate sensitivity and specificity of EC-MRI in different regions of the prostate by comparing the acquired images to whole-mount sections of the prostate after radical prostatectomy. Methods: 69 patients with localized prostate cancer were included. After virtually dividing the prostate into 12 sectors, results of EC-MRI were compared to corresponding whole-mount sections by contingency analysis. Sensitivity and specificity were calculated for each of the 12 areas as well as for the dorsal and ventral region. Results: Sensitivity right/left was dorsal apex/mid/base 41/41, 60/67 and 73/79%; ventral 33/52, 43/42 and 47/52%. Specificity right/left was dorsal apex/mid/base 92/89, 82/75 and 88/69%; ventral 100/100, 100/92 and 88/83%. Local sensitivity and specificity regarding dorsal versus ventral was 88/100 and 65/87%. Conclusions: Local sensitivity decreased from basodorsal to apicoventral direction, whereas local specificity increased in the same direction. Therefore, prostate cancers demonstrated by MRI are more prone to be detected in the basodorsal region, whereas less false-positive results are found in the apicoventral region. These variations in topographical specificity and sensitivity need to be considered before radical prostatectomy or MRI-guided biopsy.

KW - Endorectal coil

KW - Endorectal coil magnetic resonance imaging, sensitivity and specificity

KW - Local staging

KW - Magnetic resonance imaging

KW - Radical prostatectomy

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=77953229583&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=77953229583&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1159/000300572

DO - 10.1159/000300572

M3 - Article

C2 - 20332606

AN - SCOPUS:77953229583

VL - 84

SP - 388

EP - 394

JO - Urologia Internationalis

JF - Urologia Internationalis

SN - 0042-1138

IS - 4

ER -