Guillaume Bron1, Ugo Scemama2, Virginie Villes3, Nicolas Fakhry4, Sebastien Salas5, Christophe Chagnaud6, David Bendahan7, Arthur Varoquaux8. 1. Department of Medical Imaging, Conception University Hospital, Aix-Marseille University, Marseille, France. Electronic address: bron.guillaume@hotmail.fr. 2. Department of Medical Imaging, Conception University Hospital, Aix-Marseille University, Marseille, France. 3. Department of Public Healthcare EA 3279, Timone University Hospital, Aix-Marseille University, 264, Rue Saint-Pierre, 13385 Marseille, France. Electronic address: virginie.villes@univ-amu.fr. 4. Department of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Conception Hospital, Aix-Marseille University, Marseille, France. Electronic address: nicolas.fakhry@ap-hm.fr. 5. Department of Oncology, Timone University Hospital, Aix-Marseille University, 264, Rue Saint-Pierre, 13385 Marseille, France. Electronic address: sebastien.salas@ap-hm.fr. 6. Department of Medical Imaging, Conception University Hospital, Aix-Marseille University, Marseille, France; Biophysics and Nuclear Medicine, European Center for Research in Medical Imaging, UMR 7339, La Timone University Hospital, Aix-Marseille University, 264, Rue Saint-Pierre, 13385 Marseille, France. Electronic address: christophe.chagnaud@ap-hm.fr. 7. Biophysics and Nuclear Medicine, European Center for Research in Medical Imaging, UMR 7339, La Timone University Hospital, Aix-Marseille University, 264, Rue Saint-Pierre, 13385 Marseille, France. Electronic address: david.bendahan@univ-amu.fr. 8. Department of Medical Imaging, Conception University Hospital, Aix-Marseille University, Marseille, France; Biophysics and Nuclear Medicine, European Center for Research in Medical Imaging, UMR 7339, La Timone University Hospital, Aix-Marseille University, 264, Rue Saint-Pierre, 13385 Marseille, France. Electronic address: arthur.varoquaux@ap-hm.fr.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Cross sectional imaging is mandatory for oral cavity and oropharynx head and neck squamous cell carcinoma's (ooSCC) local extension and TNM staging. However a complex anatomy and frequent dental metallic artifacts make it difficult. This study assesses the clinical benefit of "Mouth Open with Tongue Extended" dynamic maneuver at CT (CTmote) as compared to the conventional CT (CTconv) and MRI. MATERIAL: Retrospectively, 58 patients with histologically proven ooSCC (oral cavity: 34; oropharynx: 24) were included in the study. All had endoscopy with biopsies, MRI, CTconv and an CTmote acquisitions. Data were splitted in 3 datasets and 2 independent radiologists performed readings blindly. Gold standard was pTNM in 31% of cases; otherwise cTNM obtained at multidisciplinary team meeting with endoscopy and mapping biopsies were used. RESULTS: CTmote was feasible for all patients including those already treated by surgery or radiotherapy. Exact TNM staging was obtained in 68%, 83%, 83% for CTconv, CTmote and MRI respectively. The best exam ratings at paired wise comparisons were 3%, 47%, 50% for CTconv, CTmote and MRI respectively. CTmote and MRI observer agreements, image quality and confidence ratings, were comparable and higher compared to CTconv (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: CTmote improves oral cavity and oropharynx tumour stage assessment compared to CTconv with performances close to those of MRI examination. In clinical practice, combining both CT with MOTE maneuver and MRI seems to be the optimal imaging strategy for local staging.
OBJECTIVES: Cross sectional imaging is mandatory for oral cavity and oropharynx head and neck squamous cell carcinoma's (ooSCC) local extension and TNM staging. However a complex anatomy and frequent dental metallic artifacts make it difficult. This study assesses the clinical benefit of "Mouth Open with Tongue Extended" dynamic maneuver at CT (CTmote) as compared to the conventional CT (CTconv) and MRI. MATERIAL: Retrospectively, 58 patients with histologically proven ooSCC (oral cavity: 34; oropharynx: 24) were included in the study. All had endoscopy with biopsies, MRI, CTconv and an CTmote acquisitions. Data were splitted in 3 datasets and 2 independent radiologists performed readings blindly. Gold standard was pTNM in 31% of cases; otherwise cTNM obtained at multidisciplinary team meeting with endoscopy and mapping biopsies were used. RESULTS: CTmote was feasible for all patients including those already treated by surgery or radiotherapy. Exact TNM staging was obtained in 68%, 83%, 83% for CTconv, CTmote and MRI respectively. The best exam ratings at paired wise comparisons were 3%, 47%, 50% for CTconv, CTmote and MRI respectively. CTmote and MRI observer agreements, image quality and confidence ratings, were comparable and higher compared to CTconv (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: CTmote improves oral cavity and oropharynx tumour stage assessment compared to CTconv with performances close to those of MRI examination. In clinical practice, combining both CT with MOTE maneuver and MRI seems to be the optimal imaging strategy for local staging.