title: [What may be expected from endorectal echography and magnetic resonance imaging in the evaluation of local extension of cancer of the prostate?].
abstract: Thirty patients presenting with a clinical stage A or B cancer underwent TRUS and MRI with a body coil prior to radical prostatectomy. Imaging and pathology were correlated to assess the limits of TRUS and MRI in pre-operative staging of prostatic carcinoma. Results showed that TRUS and MRI had a sensitivity of 42 and 66% and a specificity of 89 and 94% respectively, for the diagnosis of macroscopic capsular effraction. Seminal vesicle invasion was diagnosed by TRUS with a sensitivity of 16% and a specificity of 81%. With MRI, the sensitivity and the specificity were 85 and 94% if only gross infiltration was considered. Sensitivity dropped to 45% if microscopic invasion was included. We conclude that: 1) postero-lateral venous plexus are more easily delineated by MRI, permitting a more accurate diagnosis of capsular penetration. 2) Seminal vesicle invasion cannot be diagnosed by TRUS as the echo-structure of the cancer and the caudal junction of the seminal vesicles and vas deferent are similar. 3) A normal caudal junction on TRUS or a normal bilateral hypersignal of the seminal vesicles on MRI are associated with seminal vesicle invasion in less than 5% of cases. 4) A normal caudal junction on TRUS eliminates false positive cases of MRI related to non tumoral hyposignals of the seminal vesicles.
authors.affiliation: Service d'Urologie, Hôpital Necker, Paris.
authors.forename: F
authors.initials: F
authors.lastname: Cornud
authors.forename: X
authors.initials: X
authors.lastname: Belin
authors.forename: G
authors.initials: G
authors.lastname: Fromont
authors.forename: Y
authors.initials: Y
authors.lastname: Chrétien
authors.forename: O
authors.initials: O
authors.lastname: Hélénon
authors.forename: L
authors.initials: L
authors.lastname: Boisrond
authors.forename: J M
authors.initials: JM
authors.lastname: Casanova
authors.forename: T
authors.initials: T
authors.lastname: Meuriot
authors.forename: J F
authors.initials: JF
authors.lastname: Moreau
authors.forename: B
authors.initials: B
authors.lastname: Dufour
mesh_terms: D000368:Aged; D005069:Evaluation Studies as Topic; D005834:Genital Neoplasms, Male / Q000175:diagnosis / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging / Q000556:secondary*; D006801:Humans; D008279:Magnetic Resonance Imaging; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D011471:Prostatic Neoplasms / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging / Q000473:pathology*; D012007:Rectum / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging / Q000473:pathology*; D012669:Seminal Vesicles / Q000473:pathology*; D012680:Sensitivity and Specificity; D014463:Ultrasonography
vernacular_title: Qu'attendre de l'échographie endorectale et de l'imagerie par résonance magnétique dans le bilan d'extension locale du cancer de la prostate?