1
|
Giganti F, Kasivisvanathan V, Kirkham A, Punwani S, Emberton M, Moore CM, Allen C. Prostate MRI quality: a critical review of the last 5 years and the role of the PI-QUAL score. Br J Radiol 2021; 95:20210415. [PMID: 34233502 PMCID: PMC8978249 DOI: 10.1259/bjr.20210415] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/01/2023] Open
Abstract
There is increasing interest in the use of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) in the prostate cancer pathway. The European Association of Urology (EAU) and the British Association of Urological Surgeons (BAUS) now advise mpMRI prior to biopsy, and the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) recommendations set out the minimal technical requirements for the acquisition of mpMRI of the prostate.The widespread and swift adoption of this technique has led to variability in image quality. Suboptimal image acquisition reduces the sensitivity and specificity of mpMRI for the detection and staging of clinically significant prostate cancer.This critical review outlines the studies aimed at improving prostate MR quality that have been published over the last 5 years. These span from the use of specific MR sequences, magnets and coils to patient preparation. The rates of adherence of prostate mpMRI to technical standards in different cohorts across the world are also discussed.Finally, we discuss the first standardised scoring system (i.e., Prostate Imaging Quality, PI-QUAL) that has been created to evaluate image quality, although further iterations of this score are expected in the future.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Francesco Giganti
- Department of Radiology, University College London Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.,Division of Surgery & Interventional Science, University College London, London, UK
| | - Veeru Kasivisvanathan
- Division of Surgery & Interventional Science, University College London, London, UK.,Department of Urology, University College London Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Alex Kirkham
- Department of Radiology, University College London Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Shonit Punwani
- Department of Radiology, University College London Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.,Centre for Medical Imaging, University College London, London, UK
| | - Mark Emberton
- Division of Surgery & Interventional Science, University College London, London, UK.,Department of Urology, University College London Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Caroline M Moore
- Division of Surgery & Interventional Science, University College London, London, UK.,Department of Urology, University College London Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Clare Allen
- Department of Radiology, University College London Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Deshpande S, Kella D, Padmanabhan D. MRI in patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices: A comprehensive review. PACING AND CLINICAL ELECTROPHYSIOLOGY: PACE 2021; 44:360-372. [DOI: 10.1111/pace.14141] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/04/2020] [Revised: 11/20/2020] [Accepted: 11/29/2020] [Indexed: 12/19/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Saurabh Deshpande
- Department of Cardiac Electrophysiology Sri Jayadeva Institute of Cardiovascular Sciences and Research Bangalore India
| | - Danesh Kella
- Department of Cardiology Piedmont Heart Institute Atlanta Georgia USA
| | - Deepak Padmanabhan
- Department of Cardiac Electrophysiology Sri Jayadeva Institute of Cardiovascular Sciences and Research Bangalore India
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
MR safety considerations for patients undergoing prostate MRI. Abdom Radiol (NY) 2020; 45:4097-4108. [PMID: 32902658 DOI: 10.1007/s00261-020-02730-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/06/2020] [Revised: 08/15/2020] [Accepted: 08/30/2020] [Indexed: 10/23/2022]
Abstract
Over the past decade, there has been a dramatic increase in the number of patients undergoing prostate MRI scans. Patients presenting for prostate MRI are an ageing population and may present with a variety of passive or active implants and devices. These implants and devices can be MR safe or MR conditional or MR unsafe. Patients with certain MR-conditional active implants and devices can safely obtain prostate MRI in a specified MR environment within specific MR imaging parameters. Prostate MRI and PET-MRI in patients with passive implants such as hip prostheses, fiducial markers for SBRT, brachytherapy seeds and prostatectomy bed clips have unique concerns for image optimization that can cause geometric distortion of the diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) sequence. We discuss strategies to overcome these susceptibility artifacts. Prostate MRI in patients with MR conditional active implants such as cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED) also require modification of imaging parameters and magnet strength. In this setting, a diagnostic quality prostate MRI can be performed at a lower magnet strength (1.5 T) along with modification of imaging parameters to ensure patient safety. Imaging strategies to minimize susceptibility artifact and decrease the specific absorption rate (SAR) in both settings are described. Knowledge of MR safety considerations and imaging strategies specific to prostate MRI and PET-MRI in patients with implants and devices is essential to ensure diagnostic-quality MR images and patient safety.
Collapse
|