Comparison of semi-automated and manual methods to measure the volume of prostate cancer on magnetic resonance imaging

L. Marin, M. Ezziane, E. Comperat, P. Mozer, G. Cancel-Tassin, J. F. Coté, Daniel Racoceanu, F. Boudghene, O. Lucidarme, O. Cussenot, R. Renard Penna

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

14 Scopus citations


Purpose: The purpose of this study was to determine the accuracy of manual semi-automated and volumetric measurements to assess prostate cancer volume on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MP-MRI) using whole-mount histopathology for validation. Materials and methods: We evaluated 30 consecutive men (median age, 65.7 years; interquartile range [IQR], 61.5-70.9 years) with a median prostatic specific antigen of 8.5ng/dL (IQR, 5.5-10.5ng/dL), who underwent MP-MRI before radical prostatectomy. Index tumor volume was determined prospectively and independently on the basis of MRI and whole-mount section volumetric assessment using the maximum histologic diameter (MHD) and the histologic volume (HV). The MRI index tumor volume was determined by two independent radiologists using a single measurement of the maximum tumor dimension (MTD), a simplified MR ellipsoid volume (MREV) calculation and a MR region of interest volume (MROV) segmentation displayed by a commercially available OsiriX®. MTD was compared to MHD, whereas MREV and MROV were compared to HV. Results: Thirty index lesions (median HV, 1.514 cm3; IQR, 0.05-3.780 cm3) were analyzed. The MREV, MROV and HD were significantly correlated with each other (r>0.5). Inter-observer agreement for measurements was good for each method (r>0.780). The MTD was the best predictor of maximum histologic diameter (rCombining double low line0.980 and 0.791) and had an excellent inter-variability correlation (P
Original languageSpanish
Pages (from-to)423-428
Number of pages6
JournalDiagnostic and Interventional Imaging
StatePublished - 1 May 2017

Cite this