PURPOSE: To prospectively compare the diagnostic capability of short inversion time inversion-recovery (STIR) turbo spin-echo (SE) imaging, diffusion-weighted (DW) magnetic resonance (MR) imaging, and fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) combined positron emission tomography (PET) and computed tomography (CT) in N stage assessment in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This prospective study was approved by the institutional review board, and written informed consent was obtained from all patients. A total of 250 consecutive patients with NSCLC (136 men; mean age, 73 years; 114 women; mean age, 72 years) prospectively underwent pretherapeutic STIR turbo SE imaging, DW MR imaging, and FDG PET/CT, as well as surgical and pathologic examinations (N0 disease, n = 157; N1 disease, n = 72; N2 disease, n = 16; N3 disease, n = 5). Lymph node-to-saline ratio (LSR), lymph node-to-muscle ratio (LMR), apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC), maximal standardized uptake value (SUV(max)), and visual scoring were assessed for 135 metastatic lymph nodes and 135 randomly selected nonmetastatic lymph nodes. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis was used to determine feasible threshold values. Diagnostic capabilities for N stage assessment were compared with the McNemar test on a per-patient basis. RESULTS: When feasible, threshold values were used for quantitative assessment; sensitivity and accuracy of LSR and LMR (sensitivity, 82.8%; accuracy, 86.8%) proved to be significantly higher than those of ADC (sensitivity: 74.2%, P = .01; accuracy: 84.4%, P = .04) and SUV(max) (sensitivity: 74.2%, P = .01). For qualitative assessment, sensitivity of STIR turbo SE imaging (77.4%) was significantly higher than that of DW MR imaging (71.0%, P = .03) and FDG PET/CT (69.9%, P = .02). CONCLUSION: Quantitative and qualitative assessments of N stage disease in patients with NSCLC obtained with STIR turbo SE MR imaging are more sensitive and/or more accurate than those obtained with DW MR imaging and FDG PET/CT. SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL: http://radiology.rsna.org/lookup/suppl/doi:10.1148/radiol.11110281/-/DC1. RSNA, 2011
PURPOSE: To prospectively compare the diagnostic capability of short inversion time inversion-recovery (STIR) turbo spin-echo (SE) imaging, diffusion-weighted (DW) magnetic resonance (MR) imaging, and fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) combined positron emission tomography (PET) and computed tomography (CT) in N stage assessment in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This prospective study was approved by the institutional review board, and written informed consent was obtained from all patients. A total of 250 consecutive patients with NSCLC (136 men; mean age, 73 years; 114 women; mean age, 72 years) prospectively underwent pretherapeutic STIR turbo SE imaging, DW MR imaging, and FDG PET/CT, as well as surgical and pathologic examinations (N0 disease, n = 157; N1 disease, n = 72; N2 disease, n = 16; N3 disease, n = 5). Lymph node-to-saline ratio (LSR), lymph node-to-muscle ratio (LMR), apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC), maximal standardized uptake value (SUV(max)), and visual scoring were assessed for 135 metastatic lymph nodes and 135 randomly selected nonmetastatic lymph nodes. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis was used to determine feasible threshold values. Diagnostic capabilities for N stage assessment were compared with the McNemar test on a per-patient basis. RESULTS: When feasible, threshold values were used for quantitative assessment; sensitivity and accuracy of LSR and LMR (sensitivity, 82.8%; accuracy, 86.8%) proved to be significantly higher than those of ADC (sensitivity: 74.2%, P = .01; accuracy: 84.4%, P = .04) and SUV(max) (sensitivity: 74.2%, P = .01). For qualitative assessment, sensitivity of STIR turbo SE imaging (77.4%) was significantly higher than that of DW MR imaging (71.0%, P = .03) and FDG PET/CT (69.9%, P = .02). CONCLUSION: Quantitative and qualitative assessments of N stage disease in patients with NSCLC obtained with STIR turbo SE MR imaging are more sensitive and/or more accurate than those obtained with DW MR imaging and FDG PET/CT. SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL: http://radiology.rsna.org/lookup/suppl/doi:10.1148/radiol.11110281/-/DC1. RSNA, 2011
Authors: A A Kohan; J A Kolthammer; J L Vercher-Conejero; C Rubbert; S Partovi; R Jones; K A Herrmann; P Faulhaber Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2013-06-14 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Svetlana Balyasnikova; Johan Löfgren; Robin de Nijs; Yanna Zamogilnaya; Liselotte Højgaard; Barbara M Fischer Journal: Am J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2012-10-15
Authors: Sileny N Han; Frédéric Amant; Katrijn Michielsen; Frederik De Keyzer; Steffen Fieuws; Kristel Van Calsteren; Raphaëla C Dresen; Mina Mhallem Gziri; Vincent Vandecaveye Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2017-12-07 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Katrijn Michielsen; Ignace Vergote; Katya Op de Beeck; Frederic Amant; Karin Leunen; Philippe Moerman; Christophe Deroose; Geert Souverijns; Steven Dymarkowski; Frederik De Keyzer; Vincent Vandecaveye Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2013-12-11 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Julian Kirchner; Lino M Sawicki; Felix Nensa; Benedikt M Schaarschmidt; Henning Reis; Marc Ingenwerth; Simon Bogner; Clemens Aigner; Christian Buchbender; Lale Umutlu; Gerald Antoch; Ken Herrmann; Philipp Heusch Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2018-08-03 Impact factor: 9.236