Ki Choon Sim1, Beom Jin Park2, Min Ju Kim1, Deuk Jae Sung1, Na Yeon Han1, Yeo Eun Han1, Jung-Myun Kwak3, Hyonggin An4. 1. Department of Radiology, Korea University Anam Hospital, Korea University College of Medicine, 73 Goryeodae-ro, Seongbuk-gu, Seoul, 02841, Republic of Korea. 2. Department of Radiology, Korea University Anam Hospital, Korea University College of Medicine, 73 Goryeodae-ro, Seongbuk-gu, Seoul, 02841, Republic of Korea. radiolbj226@gmail.com. 3. Department of Surgery, Korea University Anam Hospital, 73 Goryeodae-ro, Seongbuk-gu, Seoul, 02841, Republic of Korea. 4. Department of Biostatistics, Korea University College of Medicine, 73 Goryeodae-ro, Seongbuk-gu, Seoul, 02841, Republic of Korea.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To assess the diagnostic accuracy of preoperative rectal MRI for anterior peritoneal reflection (APR) involvement in rectal cancer through comparison with the surgeon's operative findings. METHODS: This retrospective study was approved by the institutional review board; informed consent was waived. We enrolled 55 consecutive patients with suspected locally advanced mid-to-upper rectal cancer. All patients underwent rectal MRI using a 3T system. APR involvement in rectal cancer was assessed radiologically using a 5-point scale by two independent board-certified abdominal radiologists. The surgeon's evaluation during surgery was regarded as the gold standard for APR involvement. The accuracy of rectal MRI in predicting APR involvement was obtained. RESULTS: Rectal MRI showed good APR identification (rater 1, 92.7%; rater 2, 94.7%). On preoperative rectal MRI, rater 1 diagnosed 19 (34.5%) patients as having APR involvement and rater 2 diagnosed 28 (50.9%) as having APR involvement. There was moderate agreement (κ = 0.602, p < 0.001) between the two raters with regard to the evaluation of APR involvement. During surgery, the surgeon confirmed APR involvement in 13 (23.6%) patients. The sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of preoperative MRI for APR involvement were 69.2%, 76.2%, 47.4%, and 88.9%, respectively. The diagnostic accuracy of MRI for predicting APR involvement was 74.6%. CONCLUSION: Preoperative rectal MRI provides accurate anatomical information regarding APR involvement with high conspicuity. However, MRI has relatively low sensitivity (< 70%) and a low PPV (< 50%) with regard to the assessment of APR involvement in rectal tumors. Both rater 1 and rater 2 evaluated these images as positive involvement of APR. The patient underwent laparoscopic low anterior resection after preoperative evaluation. However, during surgery, the surgeon evaluated APR involvement as negative, and the final pathologic staging was confirmed as T3.
PURPOSE: To assess the diagnostic accuracy of preoperative rectal MRI for anterior peritoneal reflection (APR) involvement in rectal cancer through comparison with the surgeon's operative findings. METHODS: This retrospective study was approved by the institutional review board; informed consent was waived. We enrolled 55 consecutive patients with suspected locally advanced mid-to-upper rectal cancer. All patients underwent rectal MRI using a 3T system. APR involvement in rectal cancer was assessed radiologically using a 5-point scale by two independent board-certified abdominal radiologists. The surgeon's evaluation during surgery was regarded as the gold standard for APR involvement. The accuracy of rectal MRI in predicting APR involvement was obtained. RESULTS: Rectal MRI showed good APR identification (rater 1, 92.7%; rater 2, 94.7%). On preoperative rectal MRI, rater 1 diagnosed 19 (34.5%) patients as having APR involvement and rater 2 diagnosed 28 (50.9%) as having APR involvement. There was moderate agreement (κ = 0.602, p < 0.001) between the two raters with regard to the evaluation of APR involvement. During surgery, the surgeon confirmed APR involvement in 13 (23.6%) patients. The sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of preoperative MRI for APR involvement were 69.2%, 76.2%, 47.4%, and 88.9%, respectively. The diagnostic accuracy of MRI for predicting APR involvement was 74.6%. CONCLUSION: Preoperative rectal MRI provides accurate anatomical information regarding APR involvement with high conspicuity. However, MRI has relatively low sensitivity (< 70%) and a low PPV (< 50%) with regard to the assessment of APR involvement in rectal tumors. Both rater 1 and rater 2 evaluated these images as positive involvement of APR. The patient underwent laparoscopic low anterior resection after preoperative evaluation. However, during surgery, the surgeon evaluated APR involvement as negative, and the final pathologic staging was confirmed as T3.