Russell N Low1, Robert M Barone. 1. Department of Radiology, Sharp Memorial Hospital, San Diego, CA, USA. rlow52@yahoo.com
Abstract
PURPOSE: To determine whether abdominal and pelvic magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with diffusion-weighted and dynamic gadolinium-enhanced imaging can be used to accurately calculate the peritoneal cancer index (PCI) before surgery compared to the PCI tabulated at surgery. METHODS: Thirty-three patients underwent preoperative MRI followed by cytoreductive surgery for primary tumors of the appendix (n = 25), ovary (n = 5), colon (n = 2), and mesothelioma (n = 1). MRIs were retrospectively reviewed to determine the MRI PCI. These scores were then compared to PCI tabulated at surgery. Patients were categorized as having small-volume tumors (PCI 0–9), moderate-volume tumors (PCI 10–20), and large-volume tumors (PCI > 20). The respective anatomic site scores for both MRI and surgery were compared. RESULTS: There was no significant difference between the MRI PCI and surgical PCI for the 33 patients (P = 0.12). MRI correctly predicted the PCI category in 29 (0.88) of 33 patients. Compared to surgical findings, MRI correctly predicted small-volume tumor in 6 of 7 patients, moderate-volume tumor in 3 of 4 patients, and large-volume tumor in 20 of 22 patients. MRI and surgical PCI scores were identical in 8 patients (24%). A difference of <5 was noted in 16 patients (49%) and of 5–10 in 9 patients (27%). Compared to surgical-site findings, MRI depicted 258 truly positive sites of peritoneal tumor, 35 falsely negative sites, 35 falsely positive sites, and 101 truly negative sites, with a corresponding sensitivity of 0.88, specificity of 0.74, and accuracy of 0.84. CONCLUSIONS: Combined diffusion-weighted and gadolinium-enhanced peritoneal MRI accurately predicts the PCI before surgery in patients undergoing evaluation for cytoreductive surgery.
PURPOSE: To determine whether abdominal and pelvic magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with diffusion-weighted and dynamic gadolinium-enhanced imaging can be used to accurately calculate the peritoneal cancer index (PCI) before surgery compared to the PCI tabulated at surgery. METHODS: Thirty-three patients underwent preoperative MRI followed by cytoreductive surgery for primary tumors of the appendix (n = 25), ovary (n = 5), colon (n = 2), and mesothelioma (n = 1). MRIs were retrospectively reviewed to determine the MRI PCI. These scores were then compared to PCI tabulated at surgery. Patients were categorized as having small-volume tumors (PCI 0–9), moderate-volume tumors (PCI 10–20), and large-volume tumors (PCI > 20). The respective anatomic site scores for both MRI and surgery were compared. RESULTS: There was no significant difference between the MRI PCI and surgical PCI for the 33 patients (P = 0.12). MRI correctly predicted the PCI category in 29 (0.88) of 33 patients. Compared to surgical findings, MRI correctly predicted small-volume tumor in 6 of 7 patients, moderate-volume tumor in 3 of 4 patients, and large-volume tumor in 20 of 22 patients. MRI and surgical PCI scores were identical in 8 patients (24%). A difference of <5 was noted in 16 patients (49%) and of 5–10 in 9 patients (27%). Compared to surgical-site findings, MRI depicted 258 truly positive sites of peritoneal tumor, 35 falsely negative sites, 35 falsely positive sites, and 101 truly negative sites, with a corresponding sensitivity of 0.88, specificity of 0.74, and accuracy of 0.84. CONCLUSIONS: Combined diffusion-weighted and gadolinium-enhanced peritoneal MRI accurately predicts the PCI before surgery in patients undergoing evaluation for cytoreductive surgery.
Authors: Michele Carbone; Prasad S Adusumilli; H Richard Alexander; Paul Baas; Fabrizio Bardelli; Angela Bononi; Raphael Bueno; Emanuela Felley-Bosco; Francoise Galateau-Salle; David Jablons; Aaron S Mansfield; Michael Minaai; Marc de Perrot; Patricia Pesavento; Valerie Rusch; David T Severson; Emanuela Taioli; Anne Tsao; Gavitt Woodard; Haining Yang; Marjorie G Zauderer; Harvey I Pass Journal: CA Cancer J Clin Date: 2019-07-08 Impact factor: 508.702
Authors: Deepa Magge; Mazen S Zenati; Frances Austin; Arun Mavanur; Magesh Sathaiah; Lekshmi Ramalingam; Heather Jones; Amer H Zureikat; Matthew Holtzman; Steven Ahrendt; James Pingpank; Herbert J Zeh; David L Bartlett; Haroon A Choudry Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2013-12-10 Impact factor: 5.344
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: E Bonnet; C Mastier; A Lardy-Cléaud; P Rochefort; M Sarabi; P Guibert; A Cattey-Javouhey; F Desseigne; C de La Fouchardière Journal: Curr Oncol Date: 2019-08-01 Impact factor: 3.677
Authors: Mercedes Espada; Jose R Garcia-Flores; Mar Jimenez; Elena Alvarez-Moreno; Mar De Haro; Lucia Gonzalez-Cortijo; Gines Hernandez-Cortes; Vicente Martinez-Vega; Ricardo Sainz De La Cuesta Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2013-04-19 Impact factor: 5.315