Radiology
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Published online before print November 18, 2004, 10.1148/radiol.2341031403
This Article
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
2341031403v1
234/1/179    most recent
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Vliegen, R. F. A.
Right arrow Articles by Beets-Tan, R. G. H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Vliegen, R. F. A.
Right arrow Articles by Beets-Tan, R. G. H.
(Radiology 2005;234:179-188.)
© RSNA, 2004


Gastrointestinal Imaging

Rectal Cancer: MR Imaging in Local Staging—Is Gadolinium-based Contrast Material Helpful?1

Roy F. A. Vliegen, MD, Geerard L. Beets, MD, PhD, Maarten F. von Meyenfeldt, MD, PhD, Alfons G. H. Kessels, MD, MSc, Etienne E. M. T. Lemaire, RT, Jos M. A. van Engelshoven, MD, PhD and Regina G. H. Beets-Tan, MD, PhD

1 From the Departments of Radiology (R.F.A.V., E.E.M.T.L., J.M.A.v.E., R.G.H.B.T.), Surgery (G.L.B., M.F.v.M.), and Statistics (A.G.H.K.), University Hospital of Maastricht, P. Debyelaan 25, 6202 AZ, Maastricht, the Netherlands. From the 2002 RSNA Annual Meeting. Received August 31, 2003; revision requested November 11; final revision received April 10, 2004; accepted May 12. Address correspondence to R.F.A.V. (e-mail: rvli@rdia.azm.nl).

PURPOSE: To determine retrospectively whether addition of gadolinium-enhanced T1-weighted magnetic resonance (MR) sequence to T2-weighted turbo spin-echo (SE) MR imaging is valuable for preoperative assessment of T stage and circumferential resection margin in patients with primary rectal cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: Local institutional review board approved study and waived informed patient consent. Eighty-three patients with operable primary rectal cancer underwent preoperative MR imaging. Retrospectively, two observers independently scored T2-weighted turbo SE MR images and, in a second reading, T2-weighted images combined with gadolinium-enhanced T1-weighted turbo SE MR images for tumor penetration through rectal wall and tumor extension into mesorectal fascia. A confidence level scoring system was used, and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were generated. Histologic findings were standard of reference. Difference in performance of T2-weighted and combined T2-weighted plus gadolinium-enhanced T1-weighted sequences was analyzed by comparing corresponding areas under ROC curves (Az) for each observer. Interobserver agreement was calculated by using linear weighted {kappa} statistics.

RESULTS: Addition of contrast-enhanced T1-weighted to T2-weighted MR imaging did not significantly improve diagnostic accuracy for prediction of tumor penetration through rectal wall (Az of T2-weighted vs T2-weighted plus T1-weighted images for observer 1, 0.740 vs 0.764; observer 2, 0.856 vs 0.768) and tumor extension into mesorectal fascia (Az for observer 1, 0.962 vs 0.902; observer 2, 0.902 vs 0.911). Diagnostic performance (Az) of MR and interobserver agreement were high for prediction of tumor extension into mesorectal fascia ({kappa} = 0.61, 0.74) but only moderate for penetration through rectal wall ({kappa} = 0.47, 0.45).

CONCLUSION: Gadolinium-enhanced MR sequences did not improve diagnostic accuracy for assessment of tumor penetration through rectal wall and tumor extension into mesorectal fascia.

© RSNA, 2004




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
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]


Home page
Cancer Res.Home page
M. Oostendorp, K. Douma, T. M. Hackeng, A. Dirksen, M. J. Post, M. A.M.J. van Zandvoort, and W. H. Backes
Quantitative Molecular Magnetic Resonance Imaging of Tumor Angiogenesis Using cNGR-Labeled Paramagnetic Quantum Dots
Cancer Res., September 15, 2008; 68(18): 7676 - 7683.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
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]


Home page
RadioGraphicsHome page
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]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
RADIOLOGY RADIOGRAPHICS RSNA JOURNALS ONLINE
Copyright © 2005 by the Radiological Society of North America.