| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||||
Gastrointestinal Imaging |
1 From the University Hospital of Wales and Llandough Hospital NHS Trust, University of Wales College of Medicine, Cardiff. From the 1999 RSNA scientific assembly. Received October 26, 2001; revision requested January 15, 2002; final revision received July 1; accepted August 9. Supported by the NHS Wales Office for Research and Development in Health and Social Care. G.B. supported by a Royal College of Radiologists BUPA research fellowship. Address correspondence to G.B., Department of Radiology, Royal Marsden NHS Trust, Downs Rd, Sutton, Surrey SM2 5PT, England (e-mail: gina.brown@rmh.nthames.nhs.uk).
PURPOSE: To evaluate signal intensity and border characteristics of lymph nodes at high-spatial-resolution magnetic resonance (MR) imaging in patients with rectal cancer and to compare these findings with size in prediction of nodal status.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-two patients who underwent total mesorectal excision of the rectum to determine if they had rectal carcinoma were studied with preoperative thin-section MR imaging. Lymph nodes were harvested from 42 transversely sectioned surgical specimens. The slice of each lymph node was carefully matched with its location on the corresponding MR images. Nodal size, border contour, and signal intensity on MR images were characterized and related to histologic involvement with metastases. Differences in sensitivity and specificity with border or signal intensity were calculated with CIs by using method 10 of Newcombe.
RESULTS: Of the 437 nodes harvested, 102 were too small (<3 mm) to be depicted on MR images, and only two of these contained metastases. In 15 (68%) of 22 patients with nodal metastases, the size of normal or reactive nodes was equal to or greater than that of positive nodes in the same specimen. Fifty-one nodes were above the area imaged, and seven of these contained metastases. The diameter of benign and malignant nodes was similar; therefore, size was a poor predictor of nodal status. If a node was defined as suspicious because of an irregular border or mixed signal intensity, a superior accuracy was obtained and resulted in a sensitivity of 51 (85%) of 60 (95% CI: 74%, 92%) and a specificity of 216 (97%) of 221 (95% CI: 95%, 99%).
CONCLUSION: Prediction of nodal involvement in rectal cancer with MR imaging is improved by using the border contour and signal intensity characteristics of lymph nodes instead of size criteria.
© RSNA, 2003
Index terms: Lymphatic system, MR, 99.129411 • Lymphatic system, neoplasms, 99.33 • Rectum, neoplasms, 757.321
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  M. J. Lahaye, G. L. Beets, S. M. E. Engelen, A. G. H. Kessels, A. P. de Bruine, H. W. S. Kwee, J. M. A. van Engelshoven, C. J. H. van de Velde, and R. G. H. Beets-Tan Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer: MR Imaging for Restaging after Neoadjuvant Radiation Therapy with Concomitant Chemotherapy Part II. What Are the Criteria to Predict Involved Lymph Nodes? Radiology, July 1, 2009; 252(1): 81 - 91. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
B. Barbaro, C. Fiorucci, C. Tebala, V. Valentini, M. A. Gambacorta, F. M. Vecchio, G. Rizzo, C. Coco, A. Crucitti, C. Ratto, et al. Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer: MR Imaging in Prediction of Response after Preoperative Chemotherapy and Radiation Therapy Radiology, March 1, 2009; 250(3): 730 - 739. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 F. G. M. Taylor, R. I. Swift, L. Blomqvist, and G. Brown A Systematic Approach to the Interpretation of Preoperative Staging MRI for Rectal Cancer Am. J. Roentgenol., December 1, 2008; 191(6): 1827 - 1835. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
X. M. Zhang, H. L. Zhang, D. Yu, Y. Dai, D. Bi, M. R. Prince, and C. Li 3-T MRI of Rectal Carcinoma: Preoperative Diagnosis, Staging, and Planning of Sphincter-Sparing Surgery Am. J. Roentgenol., May 1, 2008; 190(5): 1271 - 1278. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. J. Lahaye, S. M. E. Engelen, A. G. H. Kessels, A. P. de Bruine, M. F. von Meyenfeldt, J. M. A. van Engelshoven, C. J. H. van de Velde, G. L. Beets, and R. G. H. Beets-Tan USPIO-enhanced MR Imaging for Nodal Staging in Patients with Primary Rectal Cancer: Predictive Criteria Radiology, March 1, 2008; 246(3): 804 - 811. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
MERCURY Study Group Extramural Depth of Tumor Invasion at Thin-Section MR in Patients with Rectal Cancer: Results of the MERCURY Study Radiology, April 1, 2007; 243(1): 132 - 139. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 I. Maretto, F. Pomerri, S. Pucciarelli, C. Mescoli, E. Belluco, S. Burzi, M. Rugge, P. C. Muzzio, and D. Nitti The Potential of Restaging in the Prediction of Pathologic Response After Preoperative Chemoradiotherapy for Rectal Cancer Ann. Surg. Oncol., February 1, 2007; 14(2): 455 - 461. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. D. Allen, A. R. Padhani, A. S. Dzik-Jurasz, and R. Glynne-Jones Rectal Carcinoma: MRI with Histologic Correlation Before and After Chemoradiation Therapy Am. J. Roentgenol., February 1, 2007; 188(2): 442 - 451. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
H.-K. Chun, D. Choi, M. J. Kim, J. Lee, S. H. Yun, S. H. Kim, S. J. Lee, and C. K. Kim Preoperative staging of rectal cancer: comparison of 3-T high-field MRI and endorectal sonography. Am. J. Roentgenol., December 1, 2006; 187(6): 1557 - 1562. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 MERCURY Study Group Diagnostic accuracy of preoperative magnetic resonance imaging in predicting curative resection of rectal cancer: prospective observational study BMJ, October 14, 2006; 333(7572): 779. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 F. Iafrate, A. Laghi, P. Paolantonio, M. Rengo, P. Mercantini, M. Ferri, V. Ziparo, and R. Passariello Preoperative staging of rectal cancer with MR Imaging: correlation with surgical and histopathologic findings. RadioGraphics, May 1, 2006; 26(3): 701 - 714. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 A S K Dzik-Jurasz Pelvic malignancy: integrating form and function Br. J. Radiol., October 1, 2005; 78(Special_Issue_2): S86 - S93. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
G Brown Thin section MRI in multidisciplinary pre-operative decision making for patients with rectal cancer Br. J. Radiol., October 1, 2005; 78(Special_Issue_2): S117 - S127. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
G Brown, I R Daniels, C Richardson, P Revell, D Peppercorn, and M Bourne Techniques and trouble-shooting in high spatial resolution thin slice MRI for rectal cancer Br. J. Radiol., March 1, 2005; 78(927): 245 - 251. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M.-J. Kim, J. S. Lim, Y. T. Oh, J. H. Kim, J.-J. Chung, S. H. Joo, N. K. Kim, K. Y. Lee, W. H. Kim, and K. W. Kim Preoperative MRI of Rectal Cancer With and Without Rectal Water Filling: An Intraindividual Comparison Am. J. Roentgenol., June 1, 2004; 182(6): 1469 - 1476. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
D.-M. Koh, G. Brown, L. Temple, A. Raja, P. Toomey, N. Bett, A. R. Norman, and J. E. Husband Rectal Cancer: Mesorectal Lymph Nodes at MR Imaging with USPIO versus Histopathologic Findings--Initial Observations Radiology, April 1, 2004; 231(1): 91 - 99. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
