Comparison of comfort and image quality with two endorectal coils in MRI of the prostate. Issue 2 (16th May 2013)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Powell, Daniel K.; Kodsi, Karen L.; Levin, Galina; Yim, Angela; Nicholson, Duane; Kagen, Alexander C.
• Is Part Of: Journal of magnetic resonance imaging. Volume 39:Issue 2(2014)
• Page Start: 419
• Page End: 426
• Publication Date: 2013-05-16
• Subjects: prostate MRI -- endorectal coil -- endocoil -- prostate cancer -- image quality -- patient comfort; Magnetic resonance imaging -- Periodicals; 616
• DOI: 10.1002/jmri.24179
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1053-1807

Abstract

Abstract : 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 .