Whole-body MR imaging: Evaluation of patients for metastases
Whole-body MR imaging: Evaluation of patients for metastases
复制标题
DOI：
10.1148/radiol.2331030777
复制
发表时间：
2004-10-01
期刊：
影响因子：
19.7
通讯作者：
Barkhausen, J
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Lauenstein, TC;Goehde, SC;Barkhausen, J
目的：致。比较全身磁共振（MR）成像的结果与基于计算机断层扫描（CT）、专用MR成像的分期结果，以及作为参考标准的核造影结果。材料和方法：51例已知恶性肿瘤的患者包括在本研究中。将患者放置在能够使患者快速移动通过磁体孔等中心点的滚动台平台上。胸部和腹部的成像采用快速屏气T2加权序列在横向平面。静脉注射顺磁性造影剂后，在5个站点收集三维梯度回波数据集，覆盖从颅骨到膝盖的身体。脑、肺、肝和骨转移瘤的位置和大小由两名有经验的放射科医生记录。全身MR成像的结果进行了比较，在骨骼造影，CT和专用MR imaging.Results：全身MR成像的平均检查时间为14.5分钟。所有直径大于6 mm的脑、肺和肝转移瘤均可通过全身MR成像识别。MR成像漏诊了小的肺转移瘤，这并没有改变治疗策略，但MR成像显示了CT漏诊的单个肝转移瘤。骨显像显示骨转移21例，而全身MR成像显示骨转移24例。在随访检查中证实了MR成像所见的额外骨转移，但未导致治疗改变。结论：全身MR成像在脑、肺、肝转移灶的诊断中与参考技术相比，具有良好的临床应用价值。全身MR成像在肝脏和参考技术的检测中更敏感。骨转移比。(C)RSNA 2004年。
PURPOSE: To. compare the results of whole-body magnetic resonance (MR) imaging with staging based on computed tomographic (CT), dedicated MR imaging, and nuclear scintigraphic results as standard of reference.MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty-one patients with known malignant tumors were included in the study. Patients were placed on a rolling table platform capable of moving the patient rapidly through the isocenter of the magnet bore. The thorax and the abdomen were imaged by using fast breath-hold T2-weighted sequences in the transverse plane. After intravenous administration of a paramagnetic contrast agent, three-dimensional gradient-echo data sets were collected in five stations and covered the body from the skull to the knees. Location and size of cerebral, pulmonary, hepatic, and osseous metastases were documented by two experienced radiologists. Whole-body MR imaging findings were compared with results obtained at skeletal scintigraphy, CT, and dedicated MR imaging.RESULTS: The mean examination time for whole-body MR imaging was 14.5 minutes. All cerebral, pulmonary, and hepatic metastases greater than 6 mm in diameter could be identified with whole-body MR imaging. Small pulmonary metastases were missed with MR imaging, which did not change therapeutic strategies, but MR imaging depicted a single hepatic metastasis that was missed with CT. Skeletal scintigraphy depicted osseous metastases in 21 patients, whereas whole-body MR imaging revealed osseous metastases in 24 patients. The additional osseous metastases seen with MR imaging were confirmed at follow-up examinations but did not result in a change in therapy. Whole-body MR imaging performed on a per-patient basis revealed sensitivity and specificity values of 100%.CONCLUSION: Whole-body MR imaging for the evaluation of metastases compared well with the reference techniques for cerebral, pulmonary, and hepatic lesions. Whole-body MR imaging was more sensitive in the detection of hepatic and the reference techniques. osseous metastases than were. (C) RSNA 2004.