Advanced

Rectal carcinoma: double-contrast MR imaging for preoperative staging

Wallengren, Nils-Olof LU ; Holtås, Stig LU ; Andren-Sandberg, Åke; Jonsson, E; Kristoffersson, D T and McGill, S (2000) In Radiology 215(1). p.108-114
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate and compare the imaging findings and staging of rectal carcinoma by using conventional magnetic resonance (MR) imaging, MR imaging with an enema of superparamagnetic ferristene-based contrast material, and MR imaging with an enema of ferristene solution plus intravenous injection of gadodiamide. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-nine patients (17 women, 12 men; age range, 39-91 years) referred with a diagnosis of rectal carcinoma were examined. Analysis of the rectal wall and staging of the tumor were performed. In all patients, the MR imaging findings were correlated with the histopathologic findings. RESULTS: The contrast material enema caused distention of the rectum and an intraluminal signal void, whereas the... (More)
PURPOSE: To evaluate and compare the imaging findings and staging of rectal carcinoma by using conventional magnetic resonance (MR) imaging, MR imaging with an enema of superparamagnetic ferristene-based contrast material, and MR imaging with an enema of ferristene solution plus intravenous injection of gadodiamide. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-nine patients (17 women, 12 men; age range, 39-91 years) referred with a diagnosis of rectal carcinoma were examined. Analysis of the rectal wall and staging of the tumor were performed. In all patients, the MR imaging findings were correlated with the histopathologic findings. RESULTS: The contrast material enema caused distention of the rectum and an intraluminal signal void, whereas the gadodiamide injection caused enhancement of the mucosa on T1-weighted images. This enhancement enabled evaluation of the normal rectal wall and differentiation of the mucosa, tunica muscularis, and perirectal space, which was not possible on the nonenhanced images. Double-contrast (ferristene solution plus gadodiamide) MR imaging was superior to imaging with only ferristene-based contrast material and had a sensitivity of 100%, specificity of 70%, and accuracy of 90% in distinguishing tumor stages worse than Dukes A. CONCLUSION: Double contrast material-enhanced MR imaging enables accurate rectal carcinoma staging, which is not possible at nonenhanced imaging. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
organization
publishing date
type
Contribution to journal
publication status
published
subject
in
Radiology
volume
215
issue
1
pages
108 - 114
publisher
Radiological Society of North America
external identifiers
  • pmid:10751475
  • scopus:0034108779
ISSN
1527-1315
language
English
LU publication?
yes
id
be60298b-b07a-4cd3-9123-632473139be5 (old id 1117476)
alternative location
http://radiology.rsnajnls.org/cgi/content/abstract/215/1/108
date added to LUP
2008-06-27 13:04:41
date last changed
2017-05-07 04:14:35
@article{be60298b-b07a-4cd3-9123-632473139be5,
  abstract     = {PURPOSE: To evaluate and compare the imaging findings and staging of rectal carcinoma by using conventional magnetic resonance (MR) imaging, MR imaging with an enema of superparamagnetic ferristene-based contrast material, and MR imaging with an enema of ferristene solution plus intravenous injection of gadodiamide. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-nine patients (17 women, 12 men; age range, 39-91 years) referred with a diagnosis of rectal carcinoma were examined. Analysis of the rectal wall and staging of the tumor were performed. In all patients, the MR imaging findings were correlated with the histopathologic findings. RESULTS: The contrast material enema caused distention of the rectum and an intraluminal signal void, whereas the gadodiamide injection caused enhancement of the mucosa on T1-weighted images. This enhancement enabled evaluation of the normal rectal wall and differentiation of the mucosa, tunica muscularis, and perirectal space, which was not possible on the nonenhanced images. Double-contrast (ferristene solution plus gadodiamide) MR imaging was superior to imaging with only ferristene-based contrast material and had a sensitivity of 100%, specificity of 70%, and accuracy of 90% in distinguishing tumor stages worse than Dukes A. CONCLUSION: Double contrast material-enhanced MR imaging enables accurate rectal carcinoma staging, which is not possible at nonenhanced imaging.},
  author       = {Wallengren, Nils-Olof and Holtås, Stig and Andren-Sandberg, Åke and Jonsson, E and Kristoffersson, D T and McGill, S},
  issn         = {1527-1315},
  language     = {eng},
  number       = {1},
  pages        = {108--114},
  publisher    = {Radiological Society of North America},
  series       = {Radiology},
  title        = {Rectal carcinoma: double-contrast MR imaging for preoperative staging},
  volume       = {215},
  year         = {2000},
}