Impact of an endorectal coil for 1H-magnetic resonance spectroscopy of the prostate at 3.0 T in comparison to 1.5 T: Do we need an endorectal coil?

Abstract

ObjectivesTo evaluate the influence of endorectal coil (ERC) regarding spectral quality and diagnostic suitability and diagnostic performance in 3.0T 1H-magnetic resonance spectroscopy imaging (MRSI) compared to 1.5T MRSI. Materials and methodsThe study was approved by the Institutional Review Board. MRSI of the prostate was performed on 19 patients at 1.5T with ERC (protocol 1), at 3.0T with a disabled ERC (protocol 2) and at 3.0T with ERC (protocol 3). Age, weight, body size, body-mass-index, prostate volume, time between measurements, diagnostic suitability of spectra, histopathological results after biopsy of cancer suspect lesions (CSL), sensitivity and specificity were evaluated. Signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) was calculated and compared using semiparametrical multiple Conover-comparisons. Correlations between SNR and prostate volume and BMI were indicated using Pearson correlation coefficient. Distribution of SNR was evaluated for prostate quadrants. ResultsDiagnostic suitable spectra were achieved in 76 % (protocol 1, 100% in CSL), 32 % (protocol 2, 59% in CSL) and 50 % (protocol 3, 80% in CSL) of the voxels. SNR was significantly higher in protocol 3 compared to protocol 2 and 1 (93,729 vs. 27,836 vs. 32,897, p<0.0001) with significant difference between protocol 2 and 1 (p<0.023). Highest SNR was achieved in the dorsal prostate (protocols 1 and 3; p<0.0001). Sensitivity at 3.0T was higher with use of ERC. Specificity was highest at 1.5T with ERC. ConclusionThe ERC improves the diagnostic suitability and the SNR in MRSI at 3.0T. Less voxels at 3.0T with disabled ERC are suitable for diagnosis compared to 1.5T with ERC. MRSI at 3.0T with ERC shows the highest SNR. SNR in dorsal quadrants of the prostate was higher using ERC.