Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Whole-body MRI at 1.5 T and 3 T compared with FDG-PET-CT for the detection of tumour recurrence in patients with colorectal cancer

  • Gastrointestinal
  • Published:
European Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to assess the diagnostic accuracy of whole-body MRI (WB-MRI) at 1.5 T or 3 T compared with FDG-PET-CT in the follow-up of patients suffering from colorectal cancer. In a retrospective study, 24 patients with a history of colorectal cancer and suspected tumour recurrence underwent FDG-PET-CT and WB-MRI with the use of parallel imaging (PAT) for follow-up. High resolution coronal T1w-TSE and STIR sequences at four body levels, HASTE imaging of the lungs, contrast-enhanced T1w- and T2w-TSE sequences of the liver, brain, abdomen and pelvis were performed, using WB-MRI at either 1.5 T (n = 14) or 3 T (n = 10). Presence of local recurrent tumour, lymph node involvement and distant metastatic disease was confirmed using radiological follow-up within at least 5 months as a standard of reference. Seventy seven malignant foci in 17 of 24 patients (71%) were detected with both WB-MRI and PET-CT. Both investigations concordantly revealed two local recurrent tumours. PET-CT detected significantly more lymph node metastases (sensitivity 93%, n = 27/29) than WB-MRI (sensitivity 63%, n = 18/29). PET-CT and WB-MRI achieved a similar sensitivity for the detection of organ metastases with 80% and 78%, respectively (37/46 and 36/46). WB-MRI detected brain metastases in one patient. One false-positive local tumour recurrence was indicated by PET-CT. Overall diagnostic accuracy for PET-CT was 91% (sensitivity 86%, specificity 96%) and 83% for WB-MRI (sensitivity 72%, specificity 93%), respectively. Examination time for WB-MRI at 1.5 T and 3 T was 52 min and 43 min, respectively; examination time for PET-CT was 103 min. Initial results suggest that differences in accuracy for local and distant metastases detection using FDG-PET-CT and WB-MRI for integrated screening of tumour recurrence in colorectal cancer depend on the location of the malignant focus. Our results show that nodal disease is better detected using PET-CT, whereas organ disease is depicted equally well by both investigations.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. World Health Organization (2008) Fact sheet no 297 on worldwide cancer. http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs297/en/index.html Accessed 6 Aug 2008

  2. Abir F, Alva S, Longo WE et al (2006) The postoperative surveillance of patients with colon cancer and rectal cancer. Am J Surg 192:100–108

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Desch CE, Benson AB, Somerfield MR et al (2005) Colorectal cancer surveillance: 2005 update of an American Society of Clinical Oncology practice guideline. J Clin Oncol 23:8512–8519

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Arriola E, Navarro M, Pares D et al (2006) Imaging techniques contribute to increased surgical rescue of relapse in the follow-up of colorectal cancer. Dis Colon Rectum 49:478–484

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Vigano L, Ferrero A, Lo Tesoriere, Capussotti L (2008) Liver surgery for colorectal metastases: results after 10 years of follow-up. Long-term survivors, late recurrences, and prognostic role of morbidity. Ann Surg Oncol 15:2458–2464. doi:10.1245/s10434-008-9935-9

  6. Gilliams AR, Lees WR (2008) Five-year survival following radiofrequency ablation of small, solitary, hepatic colorectal metastases. J Vasc Interv Radiol 19:712–717

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Pelosi E, Messa C, Sironi S, Picchio M, Landoni C, Bettinardi V et al (2004) Value of integrated PET/CT for lesion localisation in cancer patients: a comparative study. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 31:932–939

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Cohade C, Osman M, Leal J, Wahl RL (2003) Direct comparison of 18F-FDG-PET and PET-CT in patients with colorectal carcinoma. J Nucl Med 44:1797–803

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Even-Sapir E, Parag Y, Lerman H et al (2004) Detection of recurrence in patients with rectal cancer: PET/CT after abdominoperineal or anterior resection. Radiology 232:815–822

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Kinner S, Antoch G, Bokisch A, Veit-Haibach P (2007) Whole-body PET/CT-colonography: a possible new concept for colorectal cancer staging. Abdom Imaging 32:606–612

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Selzner M, Hany TF, Wildbrett P, McCormack L, Kadry Z, Clavien PA (2004) Does the novel PET/CT imaging modality impact on the treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer of the liver. Ann Surg 240:1027–1034

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Lauenstein TC, Goehde SC, Herborn CU, Goyen M, Oberhoff C, Debatin JF (2004) Whole-body MR imaging: evaluation of patients for metastases. Radiology 233:139–48

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Schmidt GP, Schoenberg SO, Schmid R, Stahl R, Tiling R, Becker CR et al (2006) Screening for bone metastases: whole-body MRI using a 32-channel system versus dual-modality PET-CT. Eur Radiol 17:939–949

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Thomson V, Pialat JB, Gay F, Coulon A, Voloch A, Granier A et al (2008) Whole-body MRI for metastases screening: a preliminary study using 3D VIBE sequences with automatic subtraction between non-contrast and contrast enhanced images. Am J Clin Oncol 31:285–292

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Schlemmer HP, Schäfer J, Pfannenberg C, Radny P, Korchidi S, Müller-Horvat C (2005) Fast whole-body assessment of metastatic disease using a novel magnetic resonance imaging system: initial experiences. Invest Radiol 40:64–71

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Schmidt GP, Baur-Melnyk A, Herzog P, Schmid R, Tiling R, Reiser MF et al (2005) High-resolution whole-body MRI tumor staging with the use of parallel imaging versus dual modality PET-CT: experience on a 32-channel system. Invest Radiol 40:743–753

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Fink C, Puderbach M, Biederer J, Fabel M, Dietrich O, Kauczor HU (2007) Lung MRI at 1.5 and 3 Tesla: observer preference study and lesion contrast using five different pulse sequences. Invest Radiol 42:377–383

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Schmidt GP, Wintersperger B, Graser A, Baur-Melnyk A, Reiser MF, Schoenberg SO (2007) High-resolution whole-body magnetic resonance imaging applications at 1.5 and 3 Tesla: a comparative study. Invest Radiol:449-459

  19. Hargreaves BA, Cunningham CA, Nishimura DG, Conolly SM (2004) Variable rate selective excitation for rapid MRI sequences. J Magn Reson Med 52:590–597

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Stehling G, Niederstadt T, Kramer S, Kugel H, Schwindt W, Heindel W et al (2005) Comparison of a T1-weighted inversion recovery-, gradient echo- and spin-echo sequence for imaging of the brain at 3.0 Tesla. Fortschr Roentgenstr 177:536–542

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Engelhard K, Hollenbach HP, Wohlfart K, von Imhoff E, Fellner FA (2004) Comparison of whole-body MRI with automatic moving table technique and bone scintigraphy for screening for bone metastases in patients with breast cancer. Eur Radiol 14:99–105

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Brix G, Lechel U, Glatting G, Ziegler SI, Muenzing W, Mueller SP et al (2005) Radiation exposure of patients undergoing whole-body dual-modality 18F-FDG-PET/CT examinations. J Nucl Med 46:608-613

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Vanel D, Bittoun J, Tardivon A (1998) MRI of bone metastases. Eur Radiol 8:1345–1351

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Danet IM, Semelka RC, Leonardou P, Braga L, Vaidean G, Woosley JT et al (2003) Spectrum of MRI appearances of untreated metastases of the liver. Am J Roentgenol 181:809–817

    Google Scholar 

  25. Beggs AD, Hain SF, Curran KM, O’Doherty MJ (2002) FDG-PET as a “metabolic biopsy” tool in non-lung lesions with indeterminate biopsy. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 29:542–546

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Welsh JS, Kennedy AS, Thomadsen B (2006) Selective internal radiation therapy (SIRT) for liver metastases secondary to colorectal adenocarcinoma. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 66:S62–S73

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Curati WL, Halevy A, Gibson RN, Carr DH, Blumgart LH, Steiner RE (1988) Ultrasound, CT and MRI comparison in primary and secondary tumors of the liver. Gastrointest Radiol 13:121–123

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Chen LB, Tong JL, Song HZ, Zhu H, Wang YC (2007) (18)F-DG PET/CT in detection of recurrence and metastasis of colorectal cancer. World J Gastroenterol 13:5025–5029

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Votrubova J, Belohlavek O, Jaruskova M, Oliverius M, Lohynska R, Trskova K et al (2006) The role of FDG-PET/CT in the detection of recurrent colorectal cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 33:779–784

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Diederich S, Semik M, Lentschig MG, Winter F, Scheld HH, Roos N et al (1999) Helical CT of pulmonary nodules in patients with extrathoracic malignancy: CT-surgical correlation. Am J Roentgenol 172:353–360

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Frericks BB, Meyer BC, Martus P, Wendt M, Wolf KJ, Wacker F (2008) MRI of the thorax during whole-body MRI: evaluation of different MR sequences and comparison to thoracic multi-detector computed tomography (MDCT). J Magn Reson Med:538-545

  32. Bruegel M, Gaa J, Woertler K, Ganter C, Waldt S, Hillerer C, Rummeny EJ (2007) MRI of the lung: value of different turbo spin-echo, single-shot turbo spin-echo, and 3D gradient-echo pulse sequences for the detection of pulmonary metastases. J Magn Reson Imaging 25:73–81

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Juergens KU, Weckesser M, Stegger L, Franzius C, Beetz M, Schober O et al (2006) Tumor staging using whole-body high-resolution 16-channel PET-CT: does additional low-dose chest CT in inspiration improve the detection of solitary pulmonary nodules. Eur Radiol 16:1131–1137

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Emmott J, Sanghera B, Chambers J, Wong WL (2008) The effects of N-butylscopolamine on bowel uptake: an 18F-FDG PET study. Nucl Med Commun 29:11–16

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Schiepers C, Pennickx F, de Vadder N, Merckx E, Mortlemans L, Bormans G et al (1995) Contribution of PET in the diagnosis of recurrent colorectal cancer: comparison with conventional imaging. Eur J Surg Oncol 21:517–522

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Dicle O, Obuz F, Cakmakci H (1999) Differentiation of recurrent rectal cancer and scarring with dynamic MR imaging. Br J Radiol 72:1155–1159

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Titu LV, Nicholson AA, Hartley JE et al (2006) Routine follow-up by magnetic resonance imaging does not improve detection of resectable local recurrences from colorectal cancer. Ann Surg 243:348–352

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Antoch G, Vogt FM, Freudenberg LS, Nazaradeh F, Goehde SC, Barkhausen J et al (2003) Whole-body dual-modality PET/CT and whole-body MRI for tumor staging in oncology. JAMA 290:3199–3206

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Squillaci E, Manenti G, Mancino S, Ciccio C, Calabria F, Danieli R et al (2008) Staging of colon cancer: whole-body MRI vs whole-body PET-CT-initial clinical experience. Abdom Imaging 33:676–688. doi:10.1007/s00261-007-9347-5

    Google Scholar 

  40. Brennan DD, Gleeson T, Coate LE, Cronin C, Carney D, Eustace SJ (2005) A comparison of whole-body MRI and CT for the staging of lymphoma. AJR 185:711–716

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Takahara T, Imay Y, Yamashita T, Yasuda S, Nasu S, Van Cauteren M (2004) Diffusion weighted whole body imaging with background body signal suppression (DWIBS): technical improvement using free breathing, STIR and high resolution 3D display. Radiat Med 22:275–282

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Muertz P, Krautmacher C, Traeber F, Gieseke J, Schild HH, Willinek WA (2007) Diffusion-weighted whole-body MR imaging with background body signal suppression: a feasibility study at 3.0 Tesla. Eur Radiol 17(12):3031–3037

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Lichy MP, Aschoff P, Plathow C, Stemmer A, Horger W, Mueller-Horvath C et al (2007) Tumor detection by diffusion-weighted MRI and ADC-mapping—initial clinical experiences in comparison to PET-CT. Invest Radiol 42:605–613

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Mehta RC, Marks MP, Hinks RS, Glover GH, Enzmann DR (1995) MR evaluation of vertebral metastases: T1-weighted short inversion time inversion recovery, fast spin echo, and inversion-recovery fast spin-echo sequences. Am J Neuroradiol 16:281–288

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Semelka RC, Martin DR, Balci C, Lance T (2001) Focal liver lesions: comparison of dual-phase CT and multi-sequence multi-planar MR imaging including dynamic gadolinium enhancement. J Magn Reson Imaging 13:397–401

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Dobritz M, Radkow T, Nittka M, Bautz W, Fellner FA (2002) VIBE with parallel acquisition technique—a novel approach to dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging of the liver. Fortschr Roentgenstr 174:738.41

    Google Scholar 

  47. Vogt FM, Herborn CU, Hunold P et al (2004) HASTE MRI versus chest radiography in the detection of pulmonary nodules: comparison with MDCT. AJR 183:71–78

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Frericks BB, Meyer BC, Martus P, Wendt M, Wolf KJ, Wacker F (2008) MRI of the thorax during whole-body MRI: evaluation of different MR sequences and comparison to thoracic multi-detector computed tomography (MDCT). J Magn Reson Imaging 27:538–545

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Schmidt GP, Wintersperger B, Graser A, Baur-Melnyk A, Reiser MF, Schoenberg SO (2007) High-resolution whole-body magnetic resonance imaging applications at 1.5 and 3 Tesla: a comparative study. Invest Radiol 42:449–459

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Clinical Radiology, University Hospitals Grosshadern, Ludwig Maximilian University Munich, Marchioninistr. 15, 81377, Munich, Germany

    G. P. Schmidt, A. Baur-Melnyk, C. R. Becker, M. F. Reiser & K. A. Hermann

  2. Department of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospitals Grosshadern, Ludwig Maximilian University Munich, Marchioninistr. 15, 81377, Munich, Germany

    A. Haug & R. Tiling

  3. Department of Orthopedics, University Hospitals Grosshadern, Ludwig Maximilian University Munich, Marchioninistr. 15, 81377, Munich, Germany

    S. Utzschneider

Authors
  1. G. P. Schmidt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. A. Baur-Melnyk
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. A. Haug
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. S. Utzschneider
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. C. R. Becker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. R. Tiling
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. M. F. Reiser
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. K. A. Hermann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to G. P. Schmidt.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Schmidt, G.P., Baur-Melnyk, A., Haug, A. et al. Whole-body MRI at 1.5 T and 3 T compared with FDG-PET-CT for the detection of tumour recurrence in patients with colorectal cancer. Eur Radiol 19, 1366–1378 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-008-1289-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-008-1289-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation