4.7 Article

Comprehensive imaging of residual/recurrent nasopharyngeal carcinoma using whole-body MRI at 3 T compared with FDG-PET-CT

Journal

EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY
Volume 20, Issue 9, Pages 2229-2240

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00330-010-1784-9

Keywords

Recurrent nasopharyngeal carcinoma; Magnetic resonance imaging; Computed tomography; Positron emission tomography; Whole body

Funding

  1. National Science Council [95-2314-B-182A-135-MY2]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

To prospectively compare the diagnostic potential of 3-T whole-body magnetic resonance imaging (WB-MRI) and integrated fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET)/computed tomography (CT) (FDG-PET-CT), and their combined interpretation for the detection of residual/recurrent nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC). We enrolled 179 NPC patients at high risk of residual disease or with suspected recurrence. WB-MRI and FDG-PET-CT were obtained with an interval of < 10 days. Fifty-five (30.7%) patients were found to have residual/recurrent tumours. In a patient-based analysis, the sensitivity, specificity and diagnostic capability of WB-MRI were similar to those of FDG-PET-CT (90.9% vs. 87.3%, P = 0.69; 91.1% vs. 90.3%, P > 0.99; 0.929 vs. 0.924, P = 0.83, respectively). Combined interpretation of WB-MRI with FDG-PET-CT increased the sensitivity to 94.5%. A slight improvement in the diagnostic capability was obtained using a combined interpretation of WB-MRI and FDG-PET-CT over WB-MRI alone (0.952 vs. 0.929, P = 0.22) and FDG-PET-CT alone (0.952 vs. 0.924, P = 0.11). Three-Tesla WB-MRI achieved a similar diagnostic capability to FDG-PET-CT for the detection of residual/recurrent NPC. Both techniques have different advantages, and their combined interpretation can yield a slightly higher diagnostic capability. In clinical practice, 3-T WB-MRI can offer an accurate and comprehensive assessment of residual/recurrent NPC.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available