Dynamic contrast-enhanced subtraction versus T2-weighted spin-echo MR imaging in the follow-up of colorectal neoplasm: A prospective study of 41 patients

被引:51
作者
Kinkel, K
Tardivon, AA
Soyer, P
Spatz, A
Lasser, P
Rougier, P
Vanel, D
机构
[1] INST GUSTAVE ROUSSY,DEPT RADIOL,VILLEJUIF,FRANCE
[2] INST GUSTAVE ROUSSY,DEPT PATHOL,VILLEJUIF,FRANCE
[3] INST GUSTAVE ROUSSY,DEPT SURG,VILLEJUIF,FRANCE
[4] INST GUSTAVE ROUSSY,DEPT MED ONCOL,VILLEJUIF,FRANCE
[5] HOP BICETRE,CIERM,LE KREMLIN BICETR,FRANCE
[6] HOP FOCH,DEPT RADIOL,SURESNES,FRANCE
关键词
colon; neoplasms; gadolinium; magnetic resonance (MR); comparative studies; contrast enhancement; rapid imaging; rectum; radiations; injurious effects; complications of therapeutic radiology;
D O I
10.1148/radiology.200.2.8685341
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
PURPOSE: To compare dynamic contrast-enhanced subtraction (DCES) and T2-weighted spin-echo (SE) magnetic resonance (MR) imaging in the differentiation of fibrosis from recurrence during the follow-up of treated colorectal neoplasms. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-one patients with 39 malignant and 16 benign lesions confirmed by means of surgery (n = 23), biopsy (n = 24), or 12-month follow-up examination (n = 8) underwent DCES MR imaging and Ta-weighted SE MR imaging. Enhancement of an abnormal pelvic structure within the first 90 seconds on DCES images or high signal intensity on T2-weighted SE images was considered indicative of malignancy. RESULTS: Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values were, respectively, 97%, 81%, 93%, and 100% for DCES MR imaging and 77%, 56%, 81%, and 56% for T2-weighted MR imaging. The number of correctly classified lesions was significantly higher with DCES imaging compared with T2-weighted imaging (P less than or equal to .006). CONCLUSION: DCES imaging is more accurate than T2-weighted SE imaging for differentiating fibrosis from recurrence during the follow-up of treated colorectal neoplasms.
引用
收藏
页码:453 / 458
页数:6
相关论文
共 14 条
  • [1] ADALSTEINSSON B, 1987, ACTA RADIOL, V28, P41
  • [2] THE ROLE OF MR IMAGING IN CARCINOMA OF THE URINARY-BLADDER
    BARENTSZ, JO
    RUIJS, SHJ
    STRIJK, SP
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 1993, 160 (05) : 937 - 947
  • [3] SUSPECTED RECURRENT RECTOSIGMOID CARCINOMA AFTER ABDOMINO-PERINEAL RESECTION - MR IMAGING AND HISTOPATHOLOGIC FINDINGS
    DELANGE, EE
    FECHNER, RE
    WANEBO, HJ
    [J]. RADIOLOGY, 1989, 170 (02) : 323 - 328
  • [4] TUMOR RECURRENCE VERSUS FIBROSIS IN THE FEMALE PELVIS - DIFFERENTIATION WITH MR IMAGING AT 1.5-T
    EBNER, F
    KRESSEL, HY
    MINTZ, MC
    CARLSON, JA
    COHEN, EK
    SCHIEBLER, M
    GEFTER, W
    AXEL, L
    [J]. RADIOLOGY, 1988, 166 (02) : 333 - 340
  • [5] MUSCULOSKELETAL NEOPLASMS - STATIC AND DYNAMIC GD-DTPA ENHANCED MR IMAGING
    ERLEMANN, R
    REISER, MF
    PETERS, PE
    VASALLO, P
    NOMMENSEN, B
    KUSNIERZGLAZ, CR
    RITTER, J
    ROESSNER, A
    [J]. RADIOLOGY, 1989, 171 (03) : 767 - 773
  • [6] ASSESSMENT OF BREAST-CANCER RECURRENCE WITH CONTRAST-ENHANCED SUBTRACTION MR-IMAGING - PRELIMINARY-RESULTS IN 26 PATIENTS
    GILLES, R
    GUINEBRETIERE, JM
    SHAPEERO, LG
    LESNIK, A
    CONTESSO, G
    SARRAZIN, D
    MASSELOT, J
    VANEL, D
    [J]. RADIOLOGY, 1993, 188 (02) : 473 - 478
  • [7] Gualdi G F, 1990, Radiol Med, V79, P479
  • [8] HEYWANGKOBRUNNE.SH, 1993, J COMPUT ASSIST TOMO, V17, P861
  • [9] RECURRENT RECTAL-CANCER - DIAGNOSIS WITH MR IMAGING VERSUS CT
    KRESTIN, GP
    STEINBRICH, W
    FRIEDMANN, G
    [J]. RADIOLOGY, 1988, 168 (02) : 307 - 311
  • [10] MULLERSCHIMPFLE M, 1993, RADIOLOGY, V189, P881