Prostate magnetic resonance imaging at 3 Tesla:Is administration of hyoscine-N-butyl-bromide mandatory?

作     者：Matthias C Roethke Timur H Kuru Alexander Radbruch Boris Hadaschik Heinz-Peter Schlemmer 

作者机构：Department of Radiology German Cancer Research Center Heidelberg (DKFZ) 69120 Heidelberg Germany Department of Urology Universityhospital Heidelberg 69120 Heidelberg Germany 

出 版 物：《World Journal of Radiology》 (世界放射学杂志（英文版）（电子版）)

年 卷 期：2013年第5卷第7期

页      面：259-263页

学科分类：1002[医学-临床医学] 100214[医学-肿瘤学] 10[医学] 

主　　题：Butylscopolamine Buscopan Motion artefacts Magnetic resonance imaging Prostate cancer 3 Tesla 

摘      要：AIM: To evaluate the value of administration of hyoscine-N-butyl-bromide (HBB) for image quality magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the prostate. METHODS: Seventy patients were retrospectively included in the study. Thirty-five patients were examined with administration of 40 milligrams of HBB (Buscopan ; Boehringer, Ingelheim, Germany); 35 patients were examined without HBB. A multiparametric MRI protocol was performed on a 3.0 Tesla scanner without using an endorectal coil. The following criteria were evaluated independently by two experienced radiologists on a five-point Likert scale: anatomical details (delineation between peripheral and transitional zone of the prostate, visualisation of the capsule, depiction of the neurovascular bundles); visualisation of lymph nodes; motion related artefacts; and overall image ***: Comparison of anatomical details between the two cohorts showed no statistically significant difference (3.9 ± 0.7 vs 4.0 ± 0.9, P = 0.54, and 3.8 ± 0.7 vs 4.2 ± 0.6, P = 0.07) for both readers. There was no significant advantage regarding depiction of local and iliac lymph nodes (3.9 ± 0.6 vs 4.2 ± 0.6, P = 0.07, and 3.8 ± 0.9 vs 4.1 ± 0.8, P = 0.19). Motion arte- facts were rated as none to few in both groups and showed no statistical difference (2.3 ± 1.0 vs 1.9 ± 0.9, P = 0.19, and 2.3 ± 1.1 vs 1.9 ± 0.7, P = 0.22). Overall image quality was rated good in average for both cohorts without significant difference (4.0 ± 0.6 vs 4.0 ± 0.9, P = 0.78, and 3.8 ± 0.8 vs 4.2 ± 0.6, P = 0.09). CONCLUSION: The results demonstrated no significant effect of HBB administration on image quality. The study suggests that use of HBB is not mandatory for MRI of the prostate at 3.0 Tesla.