INTRODUCTION: Diagnosis, localization of recurrence in the management of prostate cancer patients with increasing concentrations of tumor serum markers is crucial for treatment planning of the patients.
FREE DAILY AND WEEKLY NEWSLETTERS OFFERED BY CONTENT OF INTEREST
Did you find this article relevant? Subscribe to UroToday-GUOncToday!
The fields of GU Oncology and Urology are advancing rapidly including new treatments, enrolling clinical trials, screening and surveillance recommendations along with updated guidelines. Join us as one of our subscribers who rely on UroToday as their must-read source for the latest news and data on drugs. Sign up today for blogs, video conversations, conference highlights and abstracts from peer-review publications by disease and condition delivered to your inbox and read on the go.
The present review describes the role of prostate MRI and 18 Fcholine PET/computed tomography (CT) in tumor detection and extent, when there is a suspicion of residual or recurrent disease after treatment of prostate cancer.
METHOD: A systematic review of the literature was performed by searching in the PUB MED/MEDLINE database searching for articles in French or English published between the last 12years.
RESULTS: In patient with a clinical suspicion of recurrence after treatment for prostate cancer, imaging can be used to distinguish between local recurrence and metastatic disease. 11C-choline PET/CT and pelvic multiparametric MR imaging (mp MRI) are complementary in this indication. In this paper, the current status of imaging techniques used for the staging of patients with suspected locally recurrent or metastatic disease in patients treated for prostate cancer were reviewed.
CONCLUSION: Mp MRI of the prostate may be valuable imaging modality for the detection and localization of local recurrence. C-choline PET/CT offers an advantage in detecting metastatic disease to lymph node and bone
Renard-Penna R, Michaud L, Cormier L, Bastide C, Beuzeboc P, Fromont G, Hennequin C, Mongiat-Artus P, Peyromaure M, Rozet F, Richaud P, Salomon L, Soulié M. Are you the author?
Hôpital Pitié-Salpêtrière, 47, boulevard de l'Hôpital, 75013 Paris, France; Hôpital Tenon, 4, rue de la Chine, 75200 Paris, France; CHU de Dijon, 1, boulevard Jeanne-d'Arc, 21000 Dijon, France; Hôpital Nord, CHU de Marseille, 416, chemin Madrague-Ville, 13015 Marseille, France; Institut Curie, 26, rue Ulm, 75005 Paris, France; CHU Bretonneau, 2, boulevard Tonnellé, 37000 Tours, France; Hôpital Saint-Louis, 1, avenue Claude-Vellefaux, 75010 Paris, France; Hôpital Cochin, 27, rue Faubourg-Saint-Jacques, 75014 Paris, France; Institut Montsouris, université Paris-Descartes, 42, boulevard Jourdan, 75014 Paris, France; Institut Bergonié, 229, cours Argonne, 33000 Bordeaux, France; Hôpital Henri-Mondor, 51, avenue Maréchal-de-Lattre-de-Tassigny, 94000 Créteil, France; Hôpital de Rangueil, CHU de Toulouse, 1, avenue Prof.-Jean-Poulhès, 31059 Toulouse cedex 9, France.
Reference: Prog Urol. 2015 Mar;25(3):128-37.
Article in French.