PURPOSE: To compare the relative diagnostic performance of MDCT, PET/CT and Primovist-enhanced MRI (P-MRI) in the pre-resection work-up of colorectal cancer (CRC) liver metastases. METHOD AND MATERIALS: This was a retrospective study of consecutive referrals for CRC liver metastases. All patients had MDCT, PET/CT and P-MRI examinations within 3 months of each other. They were divided into 2 groups: resected and unresected. Patients in the resected group underwent liver resection within 3 months of the imaging studies. In the unresected group, patients were unresectable by imaging criteria or are awaiting surgery. Standard of reference (SOR) was intra-operative ultrasound findings and pathology for the resected group. Intermodality comparison was the SOR for the unresected group. Number of lesions identified by each imaging modality for each patient was recorded. Sensitivity (95% CI) and PPV were calculated for each imaging modality in the resected group. RESULTS: There were 19 patients in the resected group and 11 patients in the unresected group. The sensitivity (96%) and PPV (0.91) of P-MRI were both superior to that of MDCT (P = 0.0009) and PET/CT (P = 0.0003). Intermodality comparison showed that P-MRI detected more lesions than MDCT and PET/CT. CONCLUSION: The sensitivity and PPV of P-MRI was superior to that of MDCT and PET/CT. P-MRI probably has the most added value if used after MDCT and PET/CT in patients still considered eligible for liver resection.
PURPOSE: To compare the relative diagnostic performance of MDCT, PET/CT and Primovist-enhanced MRI (P-MRI) in the pre-resection work-up of colorectal cancer (CRC) liver metastases. METHOD AND MATERIALS: This was a retrospective study of consecutive referrals for CRC liver metastases. All patients had MDCT, PET/CT and P-MRI examinations within 3 months of each other. They were divided into 2 groups: resected and unresected. Patients in the resected group underwent liver resection within 3 months of the imaging studies. In the unresected group, patients were unresectable by imaging criteria or are awaiting surgery. Standard of reference (SOR) was intra-operative ultrasound findings and pathology for the resected group. Intermodality comparison was the SOR for the unresected group. Number of lesions identified by each imaging modality for each patient was recorded. Sensitivity (95% CI) and PPV were calculated for each imaging modality in the resected group. RESULTS: There were 19 patients in the resected group and 11 patients in the unresected group. The sensitivity (96%) and PPV (0.91) of P-MRI were both superior to that of MDCT (P = 0.0009) and PET/CT (P = 0.0003). Intermodality comparison showed that P-MRI detected more lesions than MDCT and PET/CT. CONCLUSION: The sensitivity and PPV of P-MRI was superior to that of MDCT and PET/CT. P-MRI probably has the most added value if used after MDCT and PET/CT in patients still considered eligible for liver resection.
Authors: L G Strauss; J H Clorius; P Schlag; B Lehner; B Kimmig; R Engenhart; M Marin-Grez; F Helus; F Oberdorfer; P Schmidlin Journal: Radiology Date: 1989-02 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: R C Semelka; S Worawattanakul; N L Kelekis; G John; J T Woosley; M Graham; W G Cance Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 1997 Nov-Dec Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: W S Whitney; R J Herfkens; R B Jeffrey; C H McDonnell; K C Li; W J Van Dalsem; R N Low; I R Francis; J F Dabatin; G M Glazer Journal: Radiology Date: 1993-12 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Carlo Bartolozzi; Francescamaria Donati; Dania Cioni; Carlo Procacci; Giovanni Morana; Antonio Chiesa; Luigi Grazioli; Giorgio Cittadini; Giuseppe Cittadini; Andrea Giovagnoni; Giovanni Gandini; Jochen Maass; Riccardo Lencioni Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2003-08-09 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Wolfgang Schima; Reinhold Függer; Ewald Schober; Claudia Oettl; Peter Wamser; Florian Grabenwöger; J Mark Ryan; Gottfried Novacek Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2002-09 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Stephan M Wildi; Christoph Gubler; Thomas Hany; Henrik Petrowsky; Pierre A Clavien; Wolfram Jochum; Tilman Gerlach; Michael Fried; Beat Mullhaupt Journal: J Clin Ultrasound Date: 2008-01 Impact factor: 0.910
Authors: Thomas D Vreugdenburg; Ning Ma; Joanna K Duncan; Dagmara Riitano; Alun L Cameron; Guy J Maddern Journal: Int J Colorectal Dis Date: 2016-09-29 Impact factor: 2.571
Authors: Renata Lilian Bormann; Eduardo Lima da Rocha; Marcelo Longo Kierzenbaum; Bruno Cheregati Pedrassa; Lucas Rios Torres; Giuseppe D'Ippolito Journal: Radiol Bras Date: 2015 Jan-Feb
Authors: Elmar M Merkle; Christoph J Zech; Carlo Bartolozzi; Mustafa R Bashir; Ahmed Ba-Ssalamah; Alexander Huppertz; Jeong Min Lee; Jens Ricke; Michiie Sakamoto; Claude B Sirlin; Sheng-Long Ye; Mengsu Zeng Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2015-06-13 Impact factor: 5.315