PURPOSE: To evaluate detection of parametrial invasion at magnetic resonance (MR) imaging with fat suppression. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In 35 patients with cancer of the cervix, MR imaging was performed with the following sequences: T2-weighted turbo spin echo (SE), turbo short inversion time inversion recovery (STIR), and unenhanced or gadolinium-enhanced T1-weighted SE with and without excitation-spoiling fat suppression. Images obtained with each sequence were evaluated for parametrial invasion by two blinded radiologists separately, who scored their level of diagnostic confidence from 0 to 10 (no confidence to high confidence). Then, all images were evaluated together and findings were correlated with histopathologic findings. RESULTS: No statistically significant differences were found between staging with T2-weighted turbo SE, turbo STIR, and T1-weighted fat-suppressed gadolinium-enhanced SE images. Staging with T1-weighted SE, T1-weighted gadolinium-enhanced SE, and T1-weighted fat-suppressed SE images was significantly worse (P < .05). Diagnostic confidence was lower (P < .001) with T1-weighted gadolinium-enhanced SE and T1-weighted fat-suppressed gadolinium-enhanced SE images (5.5 and 6.2 points, respectively) compared to staging with T2-weighted turbo SE and turbo STIR images (8.2 and 7.6 points, respectively). No statistically significant improvement in staging accuracy was found when all images were evaluated together. CONCLUSION: In MR diagnosis of parametrial invasion, the addition of fat-suppressed or gadolinium-enhanced MR images did not improve the accuracy with T2-weighted turbo SE images alone.
PURPOSE: To evaluate detection of parametrial invasion at magnetic resonance (MR) imaging with fat suppression. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In 35 patients with cancer of the cervix, MR imaging was performed with the following sequences: T2-weighted turbo spin echo (SE), turbo short inversion time inversion recovery (STIR), and unenhanced or gadolinium-enhanced T1-weighted SE with and without excitation-spoiling fat suppression. Images obtained with each sequence were evaluated for parametrial invasion by two blinded radiologists separately, who scored their level of diagnostic confidence from 0 to 10 (no confidence to high confidence). Then, all images were evaluated together and findings were correlated with histopathologic findings. RESULTS: No statistically significant differences were found between staging with T2-weighted turbo SE, turbo STIR, and T1-weighted fat-suppressed gadolinium-enhanced SE images. Staging with T1-weighted SE, T1-weighted gadolinium-enhanced SE, and T1-weighted fat-suppressed SE images was significantly worse (P < .05). Diagnostic confidence was lower (P < .001) with T1-weighted gadolinium-enhanced SE and T1-weighted fat-suppressed gadolinium-enhanced SE images (5.5 and 6.2 points, respectively) compared to staging with T2-weighted turbo SE and turbo STIR images (8.2 and 7.6 points, respectively). No statistically significant improvement in staging accuracy was found when all images were evaluated together. CONCLUSION: In MR diagnosis of parametrial invasion, the addition of fat-suppressed or gadolinium-enhanced MR images did not improve the accuracy with T2-weighted turbo SE images alone.
Authors: Maarten G Thomeer; Cees Gerestein; Sandra Spronk; Helena C van Doorn; Els van der Ham; Myriam G Hunink Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2013-03-01 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Mohammed A Shweel; Enas A Abdel-Gawad; Ehab Ali Abdel-Gawad; Hosny S Abdelghany; Alshimaa M Abdel-Rahman; Emad M Ibrahim Journal: J Clin Imaging Sci Date: 2012-07-28