Clinical Application Of Magnetic Resonance Diffusion Tensor Imaging In Prostate Cancer

Objective To investigate the relationship between ADC and FA values, the quantitative parameters of DTI of prostate cancer, and Gleason score.Methods DTI was performed in 65 cases confirmed of peripheral zone prostate cancer by biopsy or surgical pathology. ROI was drawn on the map fused DTI with T2WI to measure the ADC and FA values of the corresponding area in biopsy. The correlation between the ADC-FA values and Gleason score was analyzed. Then divided the 65cases of prostate cancer into three groups:low, intermediate and high grade, according the Gleason score. The ADC and FA values of each group were measured and analyzed.Results The ADC and FA values of prostate cancer were all negatively related with Gleason score (r=-0.731, p<0.05; r=-0.606, p<0.05). ADC values of low, intermediate and high grade prostate cancer were (961±103)×10-6mm2/s, (770±152) ×10-6 mm2/s and (652±111)×10-6mm2/s; FA values were (395±60)×10-3,(313±93) ×10-3 and (235±64)×10-3 respectively. The difference among three groups of ADC and FA values were all statistically significant (p<0.05).Conclusion The ADC values and FA values of peripheral prostate cancer were negatively correlated with Gleason score, ADC values and FA values with the possibility of quantitative diagnosis of prostate cancer, determine the classification and prognosis of prostate cancer.Objectiveto evaluate the ability of diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) related parameters of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values, anisotropy (FA) values and DTT to different the central prostate cancer(PCa) from benign prostate hyperplasia (BPH).Methods16 CG-PCa cases and 30 BPH cases proven by Histopathologically had been performed MRI and DTI. ADC values and FA values of CG-PCa and BPH were respectively measured, comparing whether there is any discrepancies between two groups. For DTT maps, two observers record the score using a four-point scale and compare the differences between two groups of lesions about fibers continuity and density.ResultsADC values and FA values in BPH-PCa g were:(1357±163)×10-6-(1058±196) ×10-6 mm2/s, and (356±116)×10-3-(407±132) ×10-3 respectively. ADC value between the two groups was statistically significant difference (p<0.05). While FA values was not(p>0.05). Interobserver agreement regarding the scale was good (k =0.723). The two viewers’ DTT map score of CG cancer were 2.9±0.9; 2.8±1.0, the BPH were 1.8±0.7;1.7±0.8. The DTT map score between the two groups for two viewers were all statistically significant difference (p<0.05).ConclusionDTI related parameters of ADC values can significantly differentiate CG-PCa from BPH, FA values cannot. DTT maps can describe prostate more institute, providing a certain value in distinguish PCa from BPH.