Noriko Suzuki1, Ami Kuribayashi1, Kei Sakamoto2, Junichiro Sakamoto1, Shin Nakamura1, Hiroshi Watanabe1, Hiroyuki Harada3, Tohru Kurabayashi1. 1. 1 Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, Graduate School, Tokyo Medical and Dental University , Tokyo , Japan. 2. 2 Department of Oral Pathology, Graduate School, Tokyo Medical and Dental University , Tokyo , Japan. 3. 3 Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Graduate School, Tokyo Medical and Dental University , Tokyo , Japan.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the diagnostic accuracies of 3T MRI in evaluating mandibular invasion of squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) in the oral cavity and to compare those with that of multidetector CT (MDCT). METHODS: 41 cases with oral SCC examined by both 3T MRI and MDCT prior to surgery were included in this study. Intravenous contrast medium was administered in all examinations. Images were evaluated for the presence or absence of mandibular invasion and mandibular canal involvement by the tumour. For MRI, both two-dimensional (2D) fast spin echo (FSE) and three-dimensional (3D) volumetric interpolated breath-hold examination (VIBE) images were used for the evaluation. For MDCT, dental CT cross-sectional images were rused. The results were correlated with histopathological findings, and sensitivity and specificity of each imaging technique were calculated.DMFR prrof. RESULTS: Histopathologically, 32 of 41 cases had mandibular invasion and 10 cases had mandibular canal involvement. For mandibular invasion, all three imaging techniques showed sensitivities of 100%. However, the specificities of 2D FSE (56%) and 3D VIBE (78%) were lower than that of MDCT (89%), although the differences were not significant. For mandibular canal involvement, whereas the sensitivities of all three imaging techniques were 100%, the specificities of 2D FSE, 3D VIBE and MDCT were 54, 62 and 85%, respectively. The specificity of 2D FSE was significantlylower than that of MDCT (P < 0.017). CONCLUSIONS: In the evaluation of mandibular invasion, 3T MRI was not as accurate as MDCT. In particular, 2D FSE sequences showed significantly lower specificity than MDCT in evaluating the extent of mandibular invasion. The use of 3D VIBE sequence slightly improved the low specificity of 2D FSE sequences.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the diagnostic accuracies of 3T MRI in evaluating mandibular invasion of squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) in the oral cavity and to compare those with that of multidetector CT (MDCT). METHODS: 41 cases with oral SCC examined by both 3T MRI and MDCT prior to surgery were included in this study. Intravenous contrast medium was administered in all examinations. Images were evaluated for the presence or absence of mandibular invasion and mandibular canal involvement by the tumour. For MRI, both two-dimensional (2D) fast spin echo (FSE) and three-dimensional (3D) volumetric interpolated breath-hold examination (VIBE) images were used for the evaluation. For MDCT, dental CT cross-sectional images were rused. The results were correlated with histopathological findings, and sensitivity and specificity of each imaging technique were calculated.DMFR prrof. RESULTS: Histopathologically, 32 of 41 cases had mandibular invasion and 10 cases had mandibular canal involvement. For mandibular invasion, all three imaging techniques showed sensitivities of 100%. However, the specificities of 2D FSE (56%) and 3D VIBE (78%) were lower than that of MDCT (89%), although the differences were not significant. For mandibular canal involvement, whereas the sensitivities of all three imaging techniques were 100%, the specificities of 2D FSE, 3D VIBE and MDCT were 54, 62 and 85%, respectively. The specificity of 2D FSE was significantlylower than that of MDCT (P < 0.017). CONCLUSIONS: In the evaluation of mandibular invasion, 3T MRI was not as accurate as MDCT. In particular, 2D FSE sequences showed significantly lower specificity than MDCT in evaluating the extent of mandibular invasion. The use of 3D VIBE sequence slightly improved the low specificity of 2D FSE sequences.
Authors: A Imaizumi; N Yoshino; I Yamada; K Nagumo; T Amagasa; K Omura; N Okada; T Kurabayashi Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2006-01 Impact factor: 3.825