Comparing Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Prostate-Specific Membrane Antigen-Positron Emission Tomography for Prediction of Extraprostatic Extension of Prostate Cancer and Surgical Guidance: A Prospective Nonrandomized Clinical Trial.

PURPOSE: Survivors of surgically managed prostate cancer may experience urinary incontinence and erectile dysfunction. Our aim was to determine if 68Ga-prostate-specific membrane antigen-11 positron emission tomography CT (PSMA-PET) in addition to multiparametric (mp) MRI scans improved surgical decision-making for nonnerve-sparing or nerve-sparing approach. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We prospectively enrolled 50 patients at risk for extraprostatic extension (EPE) who were scheduled for prostatectomy. After mpMRI and PSMA-PET images were read for EPE prediction, surgeons prospectively answered questionnaires based on mpMRI and PSMA-PET scans on the decision for nerve-sparing or nonnerve-sparing approach. Final whole-mount pathology was the reference standard. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and receiver operating characteristic curves were calculated and McNemar's test was used to compare imaging modalities. RESULTS: The median age and PSA were 61.5 years and 7.0 ng/dL. The sensitivity for EPE along the posterior neurovascular bundle was higher for PSMA-PET than mpMRI (86% vs 57%, P = .03). For MRI, the specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and area under the curve for the receiver operating characteristic curves were 77%, 40%, 87%, and 0.67, and for PSMA-PET were 73%, 46%, 95%, and 0.80. PSMA-PET and mpMRI reads differed on 27 nerve bundles, with PSMA-PET being correct in 20 cases and MRI being correct in 7 cases. Surgeons predicted correct nerve-sparing approach 74% of the time with PSMA-PET scan in addition to mpMRI compared to 65% with mpMRI alone (P = .01). CONCLUSIONS: PSMA-PET scan was more sensitive than mpMRI for EPE along the neurovascular bundles and improved surgical decisions for nerve-sparing approach. Further study of PSMA-PET for surgical guidance is warranted in the unfavorable intermediate-risk or worse populations. CLINICALTRIALS.GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT04936334.

Assessing extra-prostatic extension for surgical guidance in prostate cancer: Comparing two PSMA-PET tracers with the standard-of-care.

BACKGROUND: Incontinence and impotence occur following radical prostatectomy due to injury to nerves and sphincter muscle. Preserving nerves and muscle adjacent to prostate cancer risks positive surgical margins. Advanced imaging with MRI has improved cancer localization but limitations exist. OBJECTIVE: To measure the accuracy for assessing extra-prostatic extension at nerve bundles for 2 PSMA-PET tracers and to compare the PET accuracy to standard-of-care predictors including MRI and biopsy results. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We studied men with PSMA-targeted PET imaging, performed prior to prostatectomy in men largely with intermediate to high-risk prostate cancer, and retrospectively evaluated for assessment of extra-prostatic extension with whole-mount analysis as reference standard. Two different PSMA-PET tracers were included: 68Ga-PSMA-11 and 68Ga-P16-093. Blinded reviews of the PET and MRI scans were performed to assess extra-prostatic extension (EPE). Sensitivity and specificity for extra-prostatic extension were compared using McNemar's Chi2. RESULTS: Pre-operative PSMA-PET imaging was available for 71 patients with either 68Ga-P16-093 (n = 25) or 68Ga-PSMA-11 (n = 46). There were 24 (34%) with pT3a (EPE) and 16 (23%) with pT3b (SVI). EPE Sensitivity (87% vs. 92%), Specificity (77% vs. 76%), and ROC area (0.82 vs. 0.84) were similar between P16-093 and PSMA-11, respectively (P = 0.87). MRI (available in only 45) found high specificity (83%) but low sensitivity (60%) for EPE when using a published grading system. MRI sensitivity was significantly lower than the PSMA-PET (60% vs. 90%, P = 0.02), but similar to PET when using a >5 mm capsular contact (76% vs. 90%, P = 0.38). A treatment change to "nerve sparing" was recommended in 21 of 71 (30%) patients based on PSMA-PET imaging. CONCLUSIONS: Presurgical PSMA-PET appeared useful as a tool for surgical planning, changing treatment plans in men with ≥4+3 or multi-core 3+4 prostate cancer resulting in preservation of nerve-bundles.

Inter- and intra-observer variability of computed tomography-based parenchymal- and ductal diameters in chronic pancreatitis: a multi-observer international study.

PURPOSE: The need for incorporation of quantitative imaging biomarkers of pancreatic parenchymal and ductal structures has been highlighted in recent proposals for new scoring systems in chronic pancreatitis (CP). To quantify inter- and intra-observer variability in CT-based measurements of ductal- and gland diameters in CP patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Prospectively acquired pancreatic CT examinations from 50 CP patients were reviewed by 12 radiologists and four pancreatologists from 10 institutions. Assessment entailed measuring maximum diameter in the axial plane of four structures: (1) pancreatic head (PDhead), (2) pancreatic body (PDbody), (3) main pancreatic duct in the pancreatic head (MPDhead), and (4) body (MPDbody). Agreement was assessed by the 95% limits of agreement with the mean (LOAM), representing how much a single measurement for a specific subject may plausibly deviate from the mean of all measurements on the specific subject. Bland-Altman limits of agreement (LoA) were generated for intra-observer pairs. RESULTS: The 16 observers completed 6400 caliper placements comprising a first and second measurement session. The widest inter-observer LOAM was seen with PDhead (± 9.1 mm), followed by PDbody (± 5.1 mm), MPDhead (± 3.2 mm), and MPDbody (± 2.6 mm), whereas the mean intra-observer LoA width was ± 7.3, ± 5.1, ± 3.7, and ± 2.4 mm, respectively. CONCLUSION: Substantial intra- and inter-observer variability was observed in pancreatic two-point measurements. This was especially pronounced for parenchymal and duct diameters of the pancreatic head. These findings challenge the implementation of two-point measurements as the foundation for quantitative imaging scoring systems in CP.

When Benign Behaves Badly: Atypical Hemangiomas on Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasonography.

ABSTRACT: Hemangioma is the most common benign liver tumor and is frequently encountered as an incidental finding on imaging. The classic enhancement pattern of hemangioma is diagnostic on contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS), and it follows the same pattern of enhancement on computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging. However, there is a subset of hemangiomas that demonstrate atypical enhancement patterns on CEUS. The ability to recognize the different enhancement patterns and discern when additional imaging or biopsy may be necessary is essential to accurately interpret an atypical hemangioma on CEUS. This article reviews various enhancement patterns of hemangioma on CEUS to avoid pitfalls in characterization of focal liver lesions on CEUS.

Quantitative assessment of disease severity of primary sclerosing cholangitis with T1 mapping and extracellular volume imaging.

PURPOSE: Assess the relationship between liver T1 relaxation time and extracellular volume (ECV) fraction and the disease severity of primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC). METHODS: This retrospective study included 93 patients with PSC and 66 healthy patients in the control group. T1 relaxation times were measured in the right and left lobe, as well as in the area of stricture. T1PSC and ECVPSC were calculated by averaging T1 and ECV of both lobes and stricture site. T1 and ECV were compared between the two groups and according to PSC phenotypes and severity based on Mayo Risk Score (MRS). We also examined the relationship between T1 and ECV with non-invasive measures of fibrosis such as Fibrosis-4 index (FIB-4) and liver stiffness measurement (LSM) by transient elastography. RESULTS: Mean liver T1 (774 ± 111 ms, p < 0.001) and liver ECV (0.40 ± 0.14, p < 0.05) were significantly higher with both large-duct and small-duct-type PSC which may lack classic imaging findings on MRCP compared to the control group (p < 0.001). T1PSC and ECVPSC showed weak-moderate correlation with LSM, FIB-4, and MRS (p < 0.05). Cut-off values of liver T1 to detect patients in low-risk and high-risk MRS groups were 677 ms (AUC: 0.68, sensitivity: 76%, specificity: 53%, p = 0.03) and 743 ms (AUC: 0.83, sensitivity: 79%, specificity: 76%, p < 0.001), respectively. CONCLUSION: T1 relaxation time and ECV fraction can be used for quantitative assessment of disease severity in patients with PSC.

Wirsungocele: evaluation by MRCP and clinical significance.

PURPOSE: Wirsungocele is a rare cystic dilatation of the main pancreatic duct seen at the terminal portion of the duct of Wirsung. The purpose of our study is to evaluate the diagnostic value of MRCP in detection of Wirsungocele and the association between the MRCP-determined size of Wirsungocele and the MRCP-clinical findings of pancreatitis. METHODS: Thirty-four patients with reported 'Wirsungocele' were analyzed in the study. Two radiologists reviewed MRCP/S-MRCP images for the presence and diameter of Wirsungocele (WD), main pancreatic duct dilatation (MPDD), side branch ectasia (SBE), acinarization, and duodenal filling grade. Electronic medical record review included symptoms (abdominal pain), signs (recurrent acute/chronic pancreatitis), and select laboratory testing (serum amylase and lipase). Inter-reader agreement values were calculated by ICC. Pearson correlation analysis was performed to evaluate the association of WD with radiological and clinical findings. The comparison of WD on MRCP versus S-MRCP was calculated by Wilcoxon test. Mann-Whitney U test was used for two independent variable comparisons. RESULTS: The sensitivity of MRCP for the detection of Wirsungocele calculated using the S-MRCP and ERCP as the reference method was 76.9% and 100%, respectively. There was a significant difference in the diameter of Wirsungocele measured by MRCP vs S-MRCP (p < 0.001). There was good inter-reader agreement for the detection of Wirsungocele on MRCP and measurement of WD on MRCP and S-MRCP (ICC: 0.79, 0.89, and 0.80, respectively, p < 0.001). There was a significant difference in WD between the patients with and without MPDD (p < 0.05). There was a significant positive correlation between WD and MPDD (r = 0.66, p < 0.05). WD was significantly associated with recurrent acute pancreatitis (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: MRCP is a highly sensitive and non-invasive imaging tool for detection of Wirsungocele. Greater Wirsungocele diameter is associated with MPDD and recurrent acute pancreatitis.