In:
PeerJ, PeerJ, Vol. 4 ( 2016-01-14), p. e1532-
Abstract:
Introduction . Colorectal cancer is one of the most frequent cancers in the world and liver metastases are seen in up to 19% of patients with colorectal cancers. Detection of liver metastases is not only vital for sufficient treatment and survival, but also for a better estimation of prognosis. The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of diffusion weighted MRI of the liver as part of a combined MR evaluation of patients with rectal cancers and compare it with the standard preoperative evaluation of the liver with CT. Methods . Consecutive patients diagnosed with rectal cancers were asked to participate in the study. Preoperative CT and diffusion weighted MR (DWMR) were compared to contrast enhanced laparoscopic ultrasound (CELUS). Results . A total of 35 patients were included, 15 patients in Group-1 having the standard CT evaluation of the liver and 20 patients in Group-2 having the standard CT evaluation of the liver and DWMR of the liver. Compared with CELUS, the per-patient sensitivity/specificity was 50/100% for CT, and for DWMR: 100/94% and 100/100% for Reader 1 and 2, respectively. The per-lesion sensitivity of CT and DWMR were 17% and 89%, respectively compared with CELUS. Furthermore, one patient had non-resectable metastases after DWMR despite being diagnosed with resectable metastases after CT. Another patient was diagnosed with multiple liver metastases during CELUS, despite a negative CT-scan. Discussion . DWMR is feasible for preoperative evaluation of liver metastases. The current standard preoperative evaluation with CT-scan results in disadvantages like missed metastases and futile operations. We recommend that patients with rectal cancer, who are scheduled for MR of the rectum, should have a DWMR of the liver performed at the same time.
Type of Medium:
Online Resource
ISSN:
2167-8359
DOI:
10.7717/peerj.1532/fig-1
DOI:
10.7717/peerj.1532/fig-2
DOI:
10.7717/peerj.1532/fig-3
DOI:
10.7717/peerj.1532/fig-4
DOI:
10.7717/peerj.1532/table-1
DOI:
10.7717/peerj.1532/table-2
DOI:
10.7717/peerj.1532/table-3
DOI:
10.7717/peerj.1532/table-4
DOI:
10.7717/peerj.1532/table-5
DOI:
10.7717/peerj.1532/supp-1
DOI:
10.7717/peerj.1532/supp-2
DOI:
10.7717/peerj.1532/supp-3
Language:
English
Publisher:
PeerJ
Publication Date:
2016
detail.hit.zdb_id:
2703241-3