Advertisement

Magnetic Resonance Characteristics of Tumors

  • E. Edmund Kim

Abstract

Dynamic magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with rapid sequential image acquisition after bolus injection of gadolinium-diethylene triaminepentaacetic acid (Gd-DTPA) can be used to differentiate benign from malignant lesions. Approximately 84% of malignant tumors exhibited slope values (the slope of the contrastenhancement-over-time curve) higher than 30% per minute; 72% of benign tumors showed slopes lower than 30% per minute [1]. Both benign and malignant tumors showed some overlap resulting in an accuracy of approximately 80 %. The slope values of the time intensity curve of postcontrast dynamic sequences and peak enhancement rates were calculated during the first minute after contrast administration on a pixel-by-pixel basis using a linear fitting algorithm.

Keywords

Magnetization Transfer Ratio Dynamic Magnetic Resonance Imaging Magnetization Transfer Contrast Endorectal Magnetic Resonance Imaging Marked Contrast Enhancement 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Erlemann R, Reiser MF, Peters PE, et al. Musculoskeletal neoplasms: static and dynamic Gd-DTPA-enhanced MRI. Radiology 1989;171: 767–773.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hanna LS, Magill HL, Parham DM, et al. Childhood chondrosarcoma: MRI with Gd-DTPA. Magn Reson Imaging 1990;8:669–672.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Yamamura S, Sato K, Sugiura H, et al. Prostaglandin levels of primary bone tumor tissues correlated with peritumoral edema demonstrated by MRI. Cancer (Phila) 1997;79:255–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Erlemann R, Vassallo R, Bongartz G, et al. Musculoskeletal neoplasms: fast low-angle shot MRI with and without Gd-DTPA. Radiology 1990;17: 494–495.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Van der Woude HJ, Bloem JL, Verstraete KL, et al. Osteosarcoma and Ewing sarcoma after neoadjuvant chemotherapy: value of dynamic MRI in detecting viable tumor before surgery. AJR 1995;165:593–598.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Lang P, Grampp S, Vahlensieck M, et al. Primary bone tumor value of MR angiography for preoperative planning and monitoring response to chemotherapy. AJR 1995;165:135–142.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Vanel D, Verstraete KL, Shapeero LG. Primary tumors of the musculoskeletal system. Radiol Clin North Am 1997;35:213–237.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Glover GH, Herfkens RJ. Research directions in MR imaging. Radiology 1998;207:289–295.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Tsushima Y, Ishizaka H, Matsumoto M. Adrenal masses: differentiation with chemical shift, fast low-angle shot MRI. Radiology 1993;186:705–709.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bruhn H, Frahm J, Gyngell ML, et al. Noninvasive differentiation of tumors with use of localized H-1 MR spectroscopy in vivo: initial experience in patients with cerebral tumors. Radiology 1989;172:541–548.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Grand S, Passaro G, Ziegler A, et al. Necrotic tumor versus brain abscess: importance of amino acids detected at 1H MR spectroscopy-initial results. Radiology 1999;213:785–793.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Scheidler J, Hricak H, Vigneron DB, et al. Prostate cancer: localization with threedimensional proton MR spectroscopic imaging-clinicopathologic study. Radiology 1999; 213:473–480.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Yu KK, Scheidler J, Hricak H, et al. Prostate cancer: prediction of extracapsular extension with endorectal MRI and 3D proton MR spectroscopic imaging. Radiology 1999;213:481–488.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Van der Graaf M, van den Googert HJ. Human prostate: multisection proton MR spectroscopic imaging with a single spin-echo sequence-preliminary experience. Radiology 1999;213:919–925.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Negendank W. Studies of human tumors by MRS: a review. NMR Biomed 1992;5:303–324.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Cline GW, Magnusson I, Rothman DL, et al. Mechanism of impaired insulin-stimulatedGoogle Scholar
  17. muscle glucose metabolism in subjects with insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. J Clin Invest 1997;99:2219–2224.Google Scholar
  18. 17.
    LeBihan D. Molecular diffusion nuclear magnetic resonance imaging. Magn Reson Q 1991;7:1–30.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 18.
    Kim T, Murakami T, Takahashi S, et al. Diffusionweighted single-shot echoplanar MRI for liver disease. AJR 1999;173:393–399.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 19.
    Lang P, Wendland MR, Saeed M, et al. Osteogenic sarcoma: noninvasive in vivo assessment of tumor necrosis with diffusion-weighted MRI. Radiology 1998;206:227–235.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 20.
    Shames DM, Kuwatsura R, Vexler V, et al. Measurement of a capillary permeability to macromolecules by dynamic MRI: a quantitative noninvasive technique. Magn Reson Med 1993; 29:616–622.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 21.
    Eng J, Ceckler TL, Balaban RS. Quantitative H-1 magnetization transfer imaging in vivo. Magn Res Med 1991;17:304–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 22.
    Yeung HN, Aisen AM. Magnetization transfer contrast with periodic pulsed saturation. Radiology 1992;183:209–214.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 23.
    Yousem DM, Montone KT, Sheppard LM, et al. Head and neck neoplasms: magnetization transfer analysis. Radiology 1994;192:703–707.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 24.
    Li KCP, Hopkins KL, Moore SG, et al. Magnetization transfer contrast MRI of musculoskeletal neoplasms. Skeletal Radiol 1995;24:21–25.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • E. Edmund Kim

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations