Advertisement

European Radiology

, Volume 17, Issue 4, pp 1101–1110 | Cite as

Quantitative and qualitative characterization of vascularization and hemodynamics in head and neck tumors with a 3D magnetic resonance time-resolved echo-shared angiographic technique (TREAT)—initial results

  • H. J. Michaely
  • K. A. Herrmann
  • O. Dietrich
  • M. F. Reiser
  • S. O. Schoenberg
Head and Neck

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to characterize and quantify the vascularization and hemodynamic characteristics of head and neck tumors (HNT) with a dynamic 3D time-resolved echo-shared angiographic technique (TREAT) using the regular contrast agent (CA) bolus. Sixteen patients with HNT underwent 3D-TREAT during the CA administration on a 1.5-T magnetic resonance (MR) scanner. Using a parallel imaging acceleration factor of 2, 20 3D data sets at a temporal resolution of 2.3 s/frame were acquired. The quality of tumor delineation, vascularization type, and enhancement pattern were evaluated. Quantitative assessment included measurement of the contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), determination of signal-intensity-over-time (SIT) curves, time-to-peak enhancement within the carotid arteries and the tumor, and the delay between both. TREAT was compared to conventional digital subtraction angiography (DSA) in six patients. Tumor delineation with TREAT was very good or good in 11/16 patients, and better with TREAT than with DSA in 3/6 cases. The CNR was significantly different for glomus tumors versus hypovascularized malignant tumors with TREAT (p=0.0001), but not on T1-weighted gradient echo (T1w GE) images. Qualitative assessment of tumor vascularization on dynamic TREAT shows good correlation (r=0.75) to quantitative SIT curves. We conclude that TREAT imaging permits the characterization of tumor vascularity and holds promise as a supplementary diagnostic tool in the differential diagnosis of HNT.

Keywords

Time-resolved MRA View sharing Head and neck tumors Paraganglioma Parallel imaging 

References

  1. 1.
    Beenken SW, Urist MM (2002) Head and neck tumors. In: Current surgical diagnosis and treatment. McGraw-Hill, Mexico, pp 282–297Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Wein RO, Chandra RK, Weber RS (2004) Disorders of head and neck. In: Schwartz’s principles of surgery. McGraw-Hill, New York, pp 513–543Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Delorme S, Knopp MV (1998) Non-invasive vascular imaging: assessing tumour vascularity. Eur Radiol 8(4):517–527PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Paris J, Guelfucci B, Moulin G, Zanaret M, Triglia JM (2001) Diagnosis and treatment of juvenile nasopharyngeal angiofibroma. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 258(3):120–124PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Fagan JJ, Snyderman CH, Carrau RL, Janecka IP (1997) Nasopharyngeal angiofibromas: selecting a surgical approach. Head Neck 19(5):391–399PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    van den Berg R (2005) Imaging and management of head and neck paragangliomas. Eur Radiol 15(7):1310–1318PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Yabuuchi H, Fukuya T, Tajima T, Hachitanda Y, Tomita K, Koga M (2003) Salivary gland tumors: diagnostic value of gadolinium-enhanced dynamic MR imaging with histopathologic correlation. Radiology 226(2):345–354PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Arnold SM, Strecker R, Scheffler K, Spreer J, Schipper J, Neumann HP, Klisch J (2003) Dynamic contrast enhancement of paragangliomas of the head and neck: evaluation with time-resolved 2D MR projection angiography. Eur Radiol 13(7):1608–1611PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Griswold MA, Jakob PM, Heidemann RM, Nittka M, Jellus V, Wang J, Kiefer B, Haase A (2002) Generalized autocalibrating partially parallel acquisitions (GRAPPA). Magn Reson Med 47(6):1202–1210PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Korosec FR, Frayne R, Grist TM, Mistretta CA (1996) Time-resolved contrast-enhanced 3D MR angiography. Magn Reson Med 36(3):345–351PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Naganawa S, Ito T, Iwayama E Fukatsu H, Ishiguchi T, Ishigaki T, Ichinose N (1999) Magnitude subtraction vs. complex subtraction in dynamic contrast-enhanced 3D-MR angiography: basic experiments and clinical evaluation. J Magn Reson Imaging 10(5):813–820PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Huang Y, Webster CA, Wright GA (2002) Analysis of subtraction methods in three-dimensional contrast-enhanced peripheral MR angiography. J Magn Reson Imaging 15(5):541–550PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Langman AW, Kaplan MJ, Dillon WP, Gooding GA (1989) Radiologic assessment of tumor and the carotid artery: correlation of magnetic resonance imaging, ultrasound, and computed tomography with surgical findings. Head Neck 11(5):443–449PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Stewart K, Kountakis SE, Chang CY, Jahrsdoerfer RA (1997) Magnetic resonance angiography in the evaluation of glomus tympanicum tumors. Am J Otolaryngol 18(2):116–120PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Tuncbilek N, Karakas HM, Altaner S (2004) Dynamic MRI in indirect estimation of microvessel density, histologic grade, and prognosis in colorectal adenocarcinomas. Abdom Imaging 29(2):166–172PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Asaumi J, Yanagi Y, Konouchi H Hisatomi M, Matsuzaki H, Kishi K (2004) Application of dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI to differentiate malignant lymphoma from squamous cell carcinoma in the head and neck. Oral Oncol 40(6):579–584PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Asaumi J, Yanagi Y, Hisatomi M, Matsuzaki H, Konouchi H, Kishi K (2003) The value of dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI in diagnosis of malignant lymphoma of the head and neck. Eur J Radiol 48(2):183–187PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Chooi WK, Woodhouse N, Coley SC, Griffiths PD (2004) Pediatric head and neck lesions: assessment of vascularity by MR digital subtraction angiography. Am J Neuroradiol 25(7):1251–1255PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Escott EJ, Rao VM, Ko WD, Guitierrez JE (1997) Comparison of dynamic contrast-enhanced gradient-echo and spin-echo sequences in MR of head and neck neoplasms. Am J Neuroradiol 18(8):1411–1419PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Vogl TJ, Mack MG, Juergens M, Bergman C, Grevers G, Jacobsen TF, Lissner J, Felix R (1993) Skull base tumors: gadodiamide injection-enhanced MR imaging-drop-out effect in the early enhancement pattern of paragangliomas versus different tumors. Radiology 188(2):339–346PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    van den Berg R, Verbist BM, Mertens BJ, van der Mey AG, van Buchem MA (2004) Head and neck paragangliomas: improved tumor detection using contrast-enhanced 3D time-of-flight MR angiography as compared with fat-suppressed MR imaging techniques. Am J Neuroradiol 25(5):863–870PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • H. J. Michaely
    • 1
  • K. A. Herrmann
    • 1
  • O. Dietrich
    • 1
  • M. F. Reiser
    • 1
  • S. O. Schoenberg
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of Clinical RadiologyLudwig-Maximilians—University of Munich-GrosshadernMunichGermany

Personalised recommendations