Premium
Comparison of comfort and image quality with two endorectal coils in MRI of the prostate
Author(s) -
Powell Daniel K.,
Kodsi Karen L.,
Levin Galina,
Yim Angela,
Nicholson Duane,
Kagen Alexander C.
Publication year - 2014
Publication title -
journal of magnetic resonance imaging
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.563
H-Index - 160
eISSN - 1522-2586
pISSN - 1053-1807
DOI - 10.1002/jmri.24179
Subject(s) - medicine , coronal plane , prostate , magnetic resonance imaging , neurovascular bundle , image quality , nuclear medicine , prostate cancer , radiology , surgery , image (mathematics) , cancer , computer science , artificial intelligence
Purpose To prospectively evaluate comfort and image quality of prostate MRI using two different endorectal (ER) coils. Materials and Methods Thirty consecutive patients were prospectively randomized to receive prostate MRI using either a prostate endocoil (PEC) or colorectal endocoil (CEC). Patients and operators were surveyed with regard to endocoil placement. Four Body MRI trained radiologists rated image quality for each examination and additional selected blinded coronal T2 weighted images. Results Average patient discomfort (on a 0–10 pain scale) was greater with the PEC (5.0 for PEC and 2.7 for CEC) with a statistically significant difference ( P < 0.03). Ability to identify the neurovascular bundle (NVB) was 5.8 times more likely to be rated excellent with the CEC compared with the PEC ( P < 0.003). Image quality with CEC was 3.5 times more highly rated ( P < 0.04). In particular, signal‐to‐noise ratio (SNR) with the CEC was 3.0 times more highly rated than with the PEC ( P < 0.05). Conclusion The smaller CEC was better tolerated by patients than the traditional PEC, and resulted in at least equivalent, and in some instances improved image quality. This may result in fewer aborted cases and lead to decreased procedural intolerance to endorectal coil MRI. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2014;39:419–426 . © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc .