AIM: To compare the diagnostic accuracy of pelvic phased-array magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and endorectal ultrasonography (ERUS) in the preoperative staging of rectal carcinoma. METHODS: Thirty-four patients (15 males, 19 females) with ages ranging between 29 and 75 who have biopsy proven rectal tumor underwent both MRI and ERUS examinations before surgery. All patients were evaluated to determine the diagnostic accuracy of depth of transmural tumor invasion and lymph node metastases. Imaging results were correlated with histopathological findings regarded as the gold standard and both modalities were compared in terms of predicting preoperative local staging of rectal carcinoma. RESULTS: The pathological T stage of the tumors was: pT1 in 1 patient, pT2 in 9 patients, pT3 in 21 patients and pT4 in 3 patients. The pathological N stage of the tumors was: pN0 in 19 patients, pN1 in 9 patients and pN2 in 6 patients. The accuracy of T staging for MRI was 89.70% (27 out of 34). The sensitivity was 79.41% and the specificity was 93.14%. The accuracy of T staging for ERUS was 85.29% (24 out of 34). The sensitivity was 70.59% and the specificity was 90.20%. Detection of lymph node metastases using phased-array MRI gave an accuracy of 74.50% (21 out of 34). The sensitivity and specificity was found to be 61.76% and 80.88%, respectively. By using ERUS in the detection of lymph node metastases, an accuracy of 76.47% (18 out of 34) was obtained. The sensitivity and specificity were found to be 52.94% and 84.31%, respectively. CONCLUSION: ERUS and phased-array MRI are complementary methods in the accurate preoperative staging of rectal cancer. In conclusion, we can state that phased-array MRI was observed to be slightly superior in determining the depth of transmural invasion (T stage) and has same value in detecting lymph node metastases (N stage) as compared to ERUS.
AIM: To compare the diagnostic accuracy of pelvic phased-array magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and endorectal ultrasonography (ERUS) in the preoperative staging of rectal carcinoma. METHODS: Thirty-four patients (15 males, 19 females) with ages ranging between 29 and 75 who have biopsy proven rectal tumor underwent both MRI and ERUS examinations before surgery. All patients were evaluated to determine the diagnostic accuracy of depth of transmural tumor invasion and lymph node metastases. Imaging results were correlated with histopathological findings regarded as the gold standard and both modalities were compared in terms of predicting preoperative local staging of rectal carcinoma. RESULTS: The pathological T stage of the tumors was: pT1 in 1 patient, pT2 in 9 patients, pT3 in 21 patients and pT4 in 3 patients. The pathological N stage of the tumors was: pN0 in 19 patients, pN1 in 9 patients and pN2 in 6 patients. The accuracy of T staging for MRI was 89.70% (27 out of 34). The sensitivity was 79.41% and the specificity was 93.14%. The accuracy of T staging for ERUS was 85.29% (24 out of 34). The sensitivity was 70.59% and the specificity was 90.20%. Detection of lymph node metastases using phased-array MRI gave an accuracy of 74.50% (21 out of 34). The sensitivity and specificity was found to be 61.76% and 80.88%, respectively. By using ERUS in the detection of lymph node metastases, an accuracy of 76.47% (18 out of 34) was obtained. The sensitivity and specificity were found to be 52.94% and 84.31%, respectively. CONCLUSION: ERUS and phased-array MRI are complementary methods in the accurate preoperative staging of rectal cancer. In conclusion, we can state that phased-array MRI was observed to be slightly superior in determining the depth of transmural invasion (T stage) and has same value in detecting lymph node metastases (N stage) as compared to ERUS.
Authors: R G Beets-Tan; G L Beets; R F Vliegen; A G Kessels; H Van Boven; A De Bruine; M F von Meyenfeldt; C G Baeten; J M van Engelshoven Journal: Lancet Date: 2001-02-17 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Julio Garcia-Aguilar; Johan Pollack; Suk-Hwan Lee; Enrique Hernandez de Anda; Anders Mellgren; W Douglas Wong; Charles O Finne; David A Rothenberger; Robert D Madoff Journal: Dis Colon Rectum Date: 2002-01 Impact factor: 4.585
Authors: F Marusch; A Koch; U Schmidt; R Zippel; R Kuhn; S Wolff; M Pross; A Wierth; I Gastinger; H Lippert Journal: Endoscopy Date: 2002-05 Impact factor: 10.093
Authors: Servet Tatli; Koenraad J Mortele; Elizabeth L Breen; Ronald Bleday; Stuart G Silverman Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2006-04 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: K Chandramohan; Arun Peter Mathew; Madhu Muralee; K R Anila; K Ramachandran; Iqbal Ahamed Journal: Int Wound J Date: 2010-08-19 Impact factor: 3.315
Authors: Pietro Marone; Mario de Bellis; Valentina D'Angelo; Paolo Delrio; Valentina Passananti; Elena Di Girolamo; Giovanni Battista Rossi; Daniela Rega; Maura Claire Tracey; Alfonso Mario Tempesta Journal: World J Gastrointest Endosc Date: 2015-06-25
Authors: Gianni Mezzi; Paolo Giorgio Arcidiacono; Silvia Carrara; Francesco Perri; Maria Chiara Petrone; Francesco De Cobelli; Simone Gusmini; Carlo Staudacher; Alessandro Del Maschio; Pier Alberto Testoni Journal: World J Gastroenterol Date: 2009-11-28 Impact factor: 5.742
Authors: Baodong Liu; Miguel Ramalho; Mamdoh AlObaidy; Kiran K Busireddy; Ersan Altun; Janaka Kalubowila; Richard C Semelka Journal: World J Radiol Date: 2014-08-28