HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Figures Only Full Text Full Text (PDF) Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Low, R. N. Articles by Sigeti, J. S. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Low, R. N. Articles by Sigeti, J. S.

Extrahepatic Abdominal Imaging in Patients with Malignancy: Comparison of MR Imaging and Helical CT, with Subsequent Surgical Correlation

¹ Department of Radiology, Sharp and Children's MRI Center, Sharp Memorial Hospital, 7901 Frost St, San Diego, CA 92123 (R.N.L., G.D.A., J.S.S.)
² Department of Radiology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (R.C.S., S.W.).

PURPOSE: To compare state-of-the-art magnetic resonance (MR) imaging with single-phase helical computed tomography (CT) in abdominal screening for extrahepatic disease in patients with proved malignancy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty-seven patients with known malignancy underwent abdominal contrast material–enhanced helical CT and MR imaging from 1994 through 1997. Prospective interpretations of CT scans and MR images were used to assess each modality's sensitivity in depicting malignant extrahepatic tumor at 17 anatomic sites. Imaging findings were compared with surgical results in all patients.

RESULTS: Helical CT depicted 101 (66%) of 154 surgically confirmed extrahepatic tumor sites; MR imaging depicted 139 (90%) (P < .001). MR imaging depicted tumor in more patients at 11 of the 17 anatomic sites; at six sites, MR imaging and helical CT were equivalent. MR imaging showed significantly greater depiction of extrahepatic tumor for the peritoneum (P < .05), bowel (P < .01), and mesentery (P < .05). False-negative interpretations would have altered patient care had the extrahepatic tumor remained undetected in 13 patients for helical CT and in six patients for MR imaging.

CONCLUSION: State-of-the-art MR imaging can be used for effective abdominal screening for extrahepatic tumor in patients with malignancy. Compared with single-phase helical CT, MR imaging depicted more sites of extrahepatic tumor and was particularly advantageous for the peritoneum, mesentery, and bowel.

Index terms: Abdomen, neoplasms, _**.32,² _**.33 • Magnetic resonance (MR), comparative studies • Neoplasms, CT, _**.12115 • Neoplasms, MR, _**.1214,_**.121415, _**.12143

This article has been cited by other articles:

				R. N. Low, R. M. Barone, J. M. Gurney, and W. D. Muller Mucinous Appendiceal Neoplasms: Preoperative MR Staging and Classification Compared with Surgical and Histopathologic Findings Am. J. Roentgenol., March 1, 2008; 190(3): 656 - 665. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				K. M. Elsayes, P. T. Staveteig, V. R. Narra, J. R. Leyendecker, J. S. Lewis Jr., and J. J. Brown MRI of the Peritoneum: Spectrum of Abnormalities. Am. J. Roentgenol., May 1, 2006; 186(5): 1368 - 1379. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. Lejeune, M. J. Bismuth, T. Conroy, C. Zanni, P. Bey, L. Bedenne, J. Faivre, P. Arveux, and F. Guillemin Use of a Decision Analysis Model to Assess the Cost-Effectiveness of 18F-FDG PET in the Management of Metachronous Liver Metastases of Colorectal Cancer J. Nucl. Med., December 1, 2005; 46(12): 2020 - 2028. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R Razzaq, MBchB, MRCP, FRCR and S A Sukumar Imaging of the jaundiced adult Imaging, September 1, 2004; 16(4): 287 - 300. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				H. K. Pannu, R. E. Bristow, C. Cohade, E. K. Fishman, and R. L. Wahl PET-CT in Recurrent Ovarian Cancer: Initial Observations RadioGraphics, January 1, 2004; 24(1): 209 - 223. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				P. J. Woodward, K. Hosseinzadeh, and J. S. Saenger From the Archives of the AFIP: Radiologic Staging of Ovarian Carcinoma with Pathologic Correlation RadioGraphics, January 1, 2004; 24(1): 225 - 246. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. N. Low, S. C. Chen, and R. Barone Distinguishing Benign from Malignant Bowel Obstruction in Patients with Malignancy: Findings at MR Imaging Radiology, July 1, 2003; 228(1): 157 - 165. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				H. K. Pannu, R. E. Bristow, F. J. Montz, and E. K. Fishman Multidetector CT of Peritoneal Carcinomatosis from Ovarian Cancer RadioGraphics, May 1, 2003; 23(3): 687 - 701. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				F. V. Coakley, P. H. Choi, C. A. Gougoutas, B. Pothuri, E. Venkatraman, D. Chi, A. Bergman, and H. Hricak Peritoneal Metastases: Detection with Spiral CT in Patients with Ovarian Cancer Radiology, May 1, 2002; 223(2): 495 - 499. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				G. N. Mann, H. F. Marx, L. L. Lai, and L. D. Wagman Clinical and Cost Effectiveness of a New Hepatocellular MRI Contrast Agent, Mangafodipir Trisodium, in the Preoperative Assessment of Liver Resectability Ann. Surg. Oncol., August 1, 2001; 8(7): 573 - 579. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. C. Semelka and T. K. G. Helmberger Contrast Agents for MR Imaging of the Liver Radiology, January 1, 2001; 218(1): 27 - 38. [Abstract] [Full Text]