Literature DB >> 24211036

Whole-body MRI vs. CT for staging lymphoma: patient experience.

Hugo J A Adams1, Thomas C Kwee2, Malou A Vermoolen1, Inge Ludwig3, Marc B Bierings4, Rutger A J Nievelstein1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To assess and compare patient experience of whole-body magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to that of computed tomography (CT) for staging newly diagnosed lymphoma.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 36 patients with newly diagnosed lymphoma prospectively underwent whole-body MRI and CT for staging purposes. Patients were asked to fill in a short questionnaire with regard to the burden and experience of the examination on a Likert scale (range 1-4). Wilcoxon signed rank tests were used to determine statistically significant differences in patient (dis)comfort between the two examinations.
RESULTS: Patients reported to be significantly (P=0.007) less worried before undergoing whole-body MRI compared to CT. Patients also experienced whole-body MRI as significantly (P=0.010) less unpleasant and felt significantly (P=0.003) better shortly after the scan. The necessary preparations before CT scanning (i.e. insertion of intravenous line, drinking of contrast fluid), which are not required for whole-body MRI, were reported to be a considerable burden.
CONCLUSION: In this study in patients with newly diagnosed lymphoma, whole-body MRI was experienced as a more patient-friendly technique than CT.
Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  CT; Lymphoma; Patient experience; Whole-body MRI

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24211036     DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2013.10.008

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Radiol        ISSN: 0720-048X            Impact factor:   3.528


  6 in total

1.  Whole-body MRI compared with standard pathways for staging metastatic disease in lung and colorectal cancer: the Streamline diagnostic accuracy studies.

Authors:  Stuart A Taylor; Susan Mallett; Anne Miles; Stephen Morris; Laura Quinn; Caroline S Clarke; Sandy Beare; John Bridgewater; Vicky Goh; Sam Janes; Dow-Mu Koh; Alison Morton; Neal Navani; Alfred Oliver; Anwar Padhani; Shonit Punwani; Andrea Rockall; Steve Halligan
Journal:  Health Technol Assess       Date:  2019-12       Impact factor: 4.014

2.  Inter-Observer Agreement of Whole-Body Computed Tomography in Staging and Response Assessment in Lymphoma: The Lugano Classification.

Authors:  Ahmed Abdel Khalek Abdel Razek; Sameh Shamaa; Mahmoud Abdel Lattif; Hanan Hamid Yousef
Journal:  Pol J Radiol       Date:  2017-08-23

3.  Perceived patient burden and acceptability of whole body MRI for staging lung and colorectal cancer; comparison with standard staging investigations.

Authors:  Ruth Ec Evans; Stuart A Taylor; Sandra Beare; Steve Halligan; Alison Morton; Alf Oliver; Andrea Rockall; Anne Miles
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2018-03-20       Impact factor: 3.039

4.  Patient preferences for whole-body MRI or conventional staging pathways in lung and colorectal cancer: a discrete choice experiment.

Authors:  Anne Miles; Stuart A Taylor; Ruth E C Evans; Steve Halligan; Sandy Beare; John Bridgewater; Vicky Goh; Sam Janes; Neil Navani; Alf Oliver; Alison Morton; Andrea Rockall; Caroline S Clarke; Stephen Morris
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2019-04-01       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 5.  Scanxiety: a scoping review about scan-associated anxiety.

Authors:  Kim Tam Bui; Roger Liang; Belinda E Kiely; Chris Brown; Haryana M Dhillon; Prunella Blinman
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2021-05-26       Impact factor: 2.692

6.  Predictors of patient preference for either whole body magnetic resonance imaging (WB-MRI) or CT/ PET-CT for staging colorectal or lung cancer.

Authors:  Anne Miles; Ruth Ec Evans; Steve Halligan; Sandy Beare; John Bridgewater; Vicky Goh; Sam M Janes; Neal Navani; Alfred Oliver; Alison Morton; Steve Morris; Andrea Rockall; Stuart A Taylor
Journal:  J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol       Date:  2020-05-14       Impact factor: 1.667

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.