Skip to main content

Nuove scelte cliniche e terapeutiche in base alla risposta dell’imaging

  • Chapter
  • 601 Accesses

Riassunto

Le moderne tecniche di imaging che combinano studio morfologico e studio metabolico, per esempio 1H-MRSI, DCE-MR e PET-TC, rappresentano oggi uno strumento utile e innovativo nella gestione clinica e terapeutica del tumore della prostata. Negli ultimi anni numerosi studi hanno evidenziato che la diagnostica per immagini, pur non essendo raccomandata dalle linee guida europee di urologia come metodica routinaria [1], può fornire un valido ausilio in diversi aspetti della storia naturale del carcinoma prostatico: diagnosi inziale, stadiazione locale, valutazione dell’aggressività, road-map per il trattamento chirurgico o radioterapico, diagnosi precoce di recidiva locale post-trattamento e monitoraggio del risultato funzionale delle diverse terapie.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Bibliografia

  1. European Association of Urology (2009) Guidelines on prostate cancer (www.uroweb.org/nc/professional-resources/ guidelines/online/)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Yuen JS, Thng CH, Tan PH et al (2004) Endorectal magnetic resonance imaging and spectroscopic for the detection of tumor foci in men with prior negative transrectal ultrasound prostate biopsy. J Urol 171:1482–1486

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Comet-Batlle J, Vilanova-Busquets JC, Saladié-Roig JM (2003) The Value of endorectal MRI in the early Diagnosis of prostate cancer. Eur Urol 244:201–208

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Babaian RJ, Sayer J, Podoloff D (1994) Radioimmunoscintigraphy of pelvic lymphonodes with 111indium-labeled monoclonal antibody CYT-365. J Urol 152(6 Pt 1):1952–1955

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Salminen E, Hogg A, Binns D et al (2002) Investigations with FDG-PET scanning in prostate cancer show limited value for clinical practice. Acta Oncol 41(5):425–429

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Schiavina R, Scattoni V, Castellucci P et al (2008) 11C-Choline positron emission tomography/computerized tomography for preoperative lymph-node staging in intermediaterisk and high-risk prostate cancer: comparison with clinical staging nomograms. Eur Urol 54(2):400–401

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Sciarra A, Salciccia S, Panebianco V (2008) Proton spectroscopic and dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance: a modern approach in prostate cancer imaging. Eur Urol 54(3):485–488

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Zakian KL, Sircar K, Hricak H et al (2005) Correlation of proton MR spectroscopic imaging with Gleason score based on step-section pathologic analysis after radical prostatectomy. Radiology 234:804–814

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Casciani E, Gualdi G (2006) Prostate cancer: value of magnetic resonance spectroscopy 3D chemical shift imaging Abdom Imaging 31:490–499

    Google Scholar 

  10. Sakai I, Harada K, Kurahashi T et al (2006) Usefulness of the nadir value of serum prostate-specific antigen measured by an ultrasensitive assay as a predictor of biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy for clinically localized prostate cancer. Urol Int 76(3):227–231

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Sciarra A, Panebinanco V, Salciccia S et al (2008) Role of dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging and proton MR spectroscopic imaging in the detection of local recurrence after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer. Eur Urol 54 (3):589–600

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Takenaka A, Murakami G, Mastubara A et al (2005) Variation in course of cavernous nerve with special reference to details of topographic relationships near prostatic apex: histologic study using male cadavers; Urology 65(1): 136–142

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Hricak H, Wang L, Wei DC et al (2005) The role of preoperative endorectal magnetic resonance imaging in the decision regarding whether to preserve or resect neurovascular bundles during radical retropubic prostatectomy. J Urol 173(2):416

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Lee SE, Hong SK, Han JH et al (2007) Significance of neurovascular bundle formation observed on preoperative magnetic resonance imaging regarding postoperative erectile function after nerve-sparing radical retropubic prostatectomy. Urology 69(3):510–514

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. D’Amico AV, Halabi S, Tempany C et al (2008) Tumor volume changes on 1.5 tesla endorectal MRI during neoadjuvant androgen suppression therapy for higher risk prostate cancer and recurrence in men treated using radiation therapy results of the phase II CALGB 9682 study. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 71(1):9–15

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2010 Springer-Verlag Italia

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Cattarino, S., Di Silverio, F. (2010). Nuove scelte cliniche e terapeutiche in base alla risposta dell’imaging. In: Passariello, R., Panebianco, V., Di Silverio, F., Sciarra, A. (eds) Imaging RM della prostata. Springer, Milano. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-88-470-1516-6_30

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-88-470-1516-6_30

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Milano

  • Print ISBN: 978-88-470-1515-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-88-470-1516-6

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics