Comparison of different population-averaged arterial-input-functions in dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI of the prostate: Effects on pharmacokinetic parameters and their diagnostic performance.

To assess the effect of different population-averaged arterial-input-functions (pAIF) on pharmacokinetic parameters from dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI (DCE-MRI) and their diagnostic accuracy regarding the detection of potentially malignant prostate lesions.

66 male patients (age 65. 4±10. 8y) with suspected prostate cancer underwent multiparametric MRI of the prostate including T2-w, DWI-w and DCE-MRI sequences at a 3T MRI scanner. All detected lesions were categorized based on ACR PI-RADS version 2 and divided into 2 groups (A: PI-RADS ≤3, n=32; B: PI-RADS >3, n=34). In each DCE-MRI dataset, pharmacokinetic parameters (Ktrans, Kep and ve) and goodness of fit (Chi(2)) were generated using the Tofts model with 3 different pAIFs (fast, intermediate, slow) as provided by a commercially available postprocessing software. Pharmacokinetic parameters, their diagnostic accuracies and model fits were compared for the 3 pAIFs.

Ktrans, Kep and ve differed significantly among the 3 pAIFs (all p<. 001). Ktrans and Kep were significantly higher in group B compared to group A (all p<. 001). For Chi(2), lowest results (representing highest goodness of fit) were found for intermediate pAIF (Chi(2) 0. 073). ROC analyses revealed comparable diagnostic accuracies for the different pAIFs, which were high for Ktrans and Kep and low for ve.

Choosing various pAIF types causes a high variability in pharmacokinetic parameter estimates. Therefore, it is of great importance to consider this as potential artifact and thus keep AIF type selection constant in DCE-MRI studies.

Magnetic resonance imaging. 2015 Dec 17 [Epub ahead of print]

Ahmed E Othman, Florian Falkner, David-Emanuel Kessler, Petros Martirosian, Jakob Weiss, Stephan Kruck, Sascha Kaufmann, Robert Grimm, Ulrich Kramer, Konstantin Nikolaou, Mike Notohamiprodjo

Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Eberhard Karls University Tuebingen, University Hospital Tuebingen, 72076 Tuebingen, Germany. Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Eberhard Karls University Tuebingen, University Hospital Tuebingen, 72076 Tuebingen, Germany. , Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Eberhard Karls University Tuebingen, University Hospital Tuebingen, 72076 Tuebingen, Germany. , Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Eberhard Karls University Tuebingen, University Hospital Tuebingen, 72076 Tuebingen, Germany. , Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Eberhard Karls University Tuebingen, University Hospital Tuebingen, 72076 Tuebingen, Germany. , Department of Urology, Eberhard Karls University Tuebingen, University Hospital Tuebingen, 72076, Tuebingen, Germany. , Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Eberhard Karls University Tuebingen, University Hospital Tuebingen, 72076 Tuebingen, Germany. , Siemens Healthcare GmbH, Erlangen, Germany. , Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Eberhard Karls University Tuebingen, University Hospital Tuebingen, 72076 Tuebingen, Germany. , Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Eberhard Karls University Tuebingen, University Hospital Tuebingen, 72076 Tuebingen, Germany. , Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Eberhard Karls University Tuebingen, University Hospital Tuebingen, 72076 Tuebingen, Germany.

PubMed