Rectal carcinoma: staging at MR imaging with endorectal surface coil. Work in progress.

Chan, Teresa W.; Kressel, H Y; Milestone, Barton; Tomachefski, J; Schnall, Mitch; Rosato, Ernest F.; Daly, J.M.

doi:10.1148/radiology.181.2.1924789

Cited by 110 publications

(45 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…MRI with the use of transrectal coils may be a very promising technique for the local staging of rectal tumors, but, at present, costs are much higher and its real clinical impact is still to be proved [19,20].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Water enema computed tomography (WE-CT) in the local staging of low colorectal neoplasms: comparison with transrectal ultrasound

et al. 1998

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: To determine the accuracy of computed tomography performed with a water enema application (WE-CT) in the local staging of low colorectal neoplasms and to compare the results with those of transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS). Methods: Forty patients with low colorectal tumors were evaluated prospectively by CT with the simultaneous administration of a lukewarm rectal enema (0.5-1.5 L). Thin slices (5 mm) and intravenous application of iodinated contrast media were routinely used. TRUS was performed in 18 patients. Tumor size, location, and staging according to the TNM classification of the UICC were registered. Tumors were classified as õT3 (T1 or T2) or as T3 or T4. For staging peritumoral lymph node metastases on WE-CT, two criteria of positivity were tested: N/ if at least one peritumoral node ¢5 mm in diameter was seen (reading A); N/ if at least one peritumoral node ¢5 mm or three peritumoral nodes õ5 mm were identified (reading B). Results: For the tumor staging, WE-CT showed a sensitivity of 90%, a specificity of 73%, a positive predictive value (PPV) of 90%, a negative predictive value (NPV) of 73%, and an accuracy of 85%. For TRUS, the results were sensitivity of 73%, specificity of 29%, PPV of 62%, NPV of 40%, and an accuracy of 39%. Concerning nodal staging with WE-CT, results were superior when reading A was used: sensitivity Å 84%, specificity Å 83%, PPV Å 73%, NPV Å 91%, and accuracy Å 84%. TRUS showed a sensitivity of 29%, specificity of 100%, PPV of 100%, NPV of 67%, and an accuracy of 71%.Correspondence to: F. Caseiro-Alves Conclusion: WE-CT is a reliable technique for the local staging of low colorectal tumors that can be superior to TRUS. For diagnosis of peritumoral metastatic lymph nodes on WE-CT, the 5-mm diameter cutoff value is the most appropriate size criterion.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Water enema computed tomography (WE-CT) in the local staging of low colorectal neoplasms: comparison with transrectal ultrasound

et al. 1998

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Obliteration of this band by adjacent tumor was the criterion for diagnosing tumor as stage T3 or greater. Criteria for this and other tumor staging decisions with endorectal MR imaging and endoscopic rectal sonography were based on previously described data [8,9,11,12].…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment of rectal tumor infiltration utilizing endorectal MR imaging and comparison with endoscopic rectal sonography

et al. 1997

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…At present, four imaging methods are commonly used for staging: endoluminal sonography, body-coil MR imaging, phased-array-coil MR imaging, and endoluminal MR imaging. Theoretically, endoluminal imaging will yield optimal staging results because it combines the high spatial resolution of an endoluminal technique with the high contrast resolution intrinsic to MR imaging (15,16). The accuracy (75%-85%) of endoluminal MR imaging is superior to that of body-coil MR imaging, but whether this will lead to better surgical outcomes remains uncertain (17)(18)(19).…”

Section: Stoker Et Almentioning

confidence: 99%

Endoluminal MR Imaging of the Rectum and Anus: Technique, Applications, and Pitfalls

Stoker

Rociu²,

Aw³

et al. 1999

RadioGraphics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Anorectal diseases (eg, fecal incontinence, perianal and anovaginal fistulas, anorectal tumors) require imaging for proper case management. Endoluminal magnetic resonance (MR) imaging has become an important part of diagnostic work-up in such cases. Optimal endoluminal MR imaging requires careful attention to patient preparation, imaging protocols, and potential pitfalls in interpretation. Comfortable positioning and the use of an antiperistaltic drug are vital for adequate patient preparation. Selected sequences and imaging planes are used in imaging protocols tailored for specific diseases. In fecal incontinence, three-dimensional sequences allow detailed demonstration of the anal anatomy and related defects. In perianal and anovaginal fistulas, longitudinal imaging planes help determine the superior extent of the abnormality. In anorectal tumors, T1-weighted turbo spin-echo MR imaging can help detect extension into the perirectal fat and T2-weighted turbo spin-echo MR imaging is used to optimize contrast between tumor and the rectal wall. Off-axis and radial imaging planes are used in all anorectal diseases to minimize partial volume effects. Potential pitfalls include various parts of the normal anal anatomy mimicking sphincter defects, veins and hemorrhoids mimicking fistulas and abscesses, and overhanging tumor mimicking more extensive tumor. Adequate patient preparation combined with proper technique and a knowledge of potential pitfalls will allow optimal endoluminal MR imaging of the rectum and anus. MR, 757.121411, 757.121413 • Rectum, neoplasms, 757.30 RadioGraphics 1999; 19:383-398 1 From the Departments of Radiology (J.S., E.R., A.W.Z., J.S.L.) and Surgery (W.R.S.), University Hospital Rotterdam Dijkzigt, Erasmus University Rotterdam, the Netherlands, and the Department of Radiology, Academic Medical Center, P.O. Box 22700, 1100 DE Amsterdam, the Netherlands (J.S., J.S.L.). Recipient of a Certificate of Merit award for a scientific exhibit at the 1997 RSNA scientific assembly.

show abstract

Rectal carcinoma: staging at MR imaging with endorectal surface coil. Work in progress.

Cited by 110 publications

References 0 publications

Water enema computed tomography (WE-CT) in the local staging of low colorectal neoplasms: comparison with transrectal ultrasound

Water enema computed tomography (WE-CT) in the local staging of low colorectal neoplasms: comparison with transrectal ultrasound

Assessment of rectal tumor infiltration utilizing endorectal MR imaging and comparison with endoscopic rectal sonography

Endoluminal MR Imaging of the Rectum and Anus: Technique, Applications, and Pitfalls

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About