Whole-body MRI with diffusion-weighted sequences compared with 18 FDG PET-CT, CT and superficial lymph node ultrasonography in the staging of advanced cutaneous melanoma: a prospective study

被引:31
|
作者
Jouvet, J. C. [1 ]
Thomas, L. [2 ]
Thomson, V. [1 ]
Yanes, M. [1 ]
Journe, C. [1 ]
Morelec, I. [3 ]
Bracoud, L. [4 ]
Durupt, F. [2 ]
Giammarile, F. [3 ]
Berthezene, Y. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Lyon 1, Ctr Hosp Croix Rousse, Dept Radiol, F-69365 Lyon, France
[2] Univ Lyon 1, Ctr Hosp Lyon Sud, Dept Dermatol, F-69365 Lyon, France
[3] Univ Lyon 1, Ctr Hosp Lyon Sud, Dept Nucl Med, F-69365 Lyon, France
[4] BioClinica, Lyon, France
关键词
CELL LUNG-CANCER; COMPUTED-TOMOGRAPHY; BONE METASTASES; IMAGING DWI; DIAGNOSIS; UTILITY; SYSTEM;
D O I
10.1111/jdv.12078
中图分类号
R75 [皮肤病学与性病学];
学科分类号
100206 ;
摘要
ObjectivesThe aim of our study was to compare the diagnostic performances of non-radiating whole-body magnetic resonance imaging (wbMRI), either volumetric, with Volumetric interpolated breath-hold examination (VIBE) or metabolic, with diffusion-weighted sequences (wbMRI), with classical irradiating techniques such as PET-CT, CT and with lymph node ultrasonography (US) for the staging of advanced melanoma. Patients and methodsThirty-seven melanoma AJCC stage IV patients were prospectively included. All images were independently interpreted without prior knowledge of the results of studies performed with concurrent techniques, and all imaging techniques were scheduled within a mean interval of 7days. The overall and site-specific diagnosis performances of each imaging modality were studied, as well as the interest of combined MRI VIBE and diffusion sequences. ResultsThe number of visceral or lymph node metastases spotted was, respectively, 218, with 125 metastases for wbMRI, 191/103 for PET-CT, 209/115 for CT and 33/13 for lymph node US. No statistically significant difference (P<0.05) of overall diagnostic performances between wbMRI (Se 84%, Sp 87.1%, PPV 89.8%, NPV 80.2%) and PET-CT (Se 79.8%, Sp 93.1%, PPV 93.2%, NPV 79.4%) was observed. No statistically significant difference was found between wbMRI and PET-CT with two channels for CT with respect to different metastatic sites. Compared with the CT, wbMRI had significantly better overall specificity (P=0.0011) and PPV (P=0.02). For lung exploration, sensitivity of wbMRI (51.6%) was inferior to CT (71.4%). To detect superficial metastatic lymph nodes, wbMRI and US both showed high diagnostic accuracy with no statistically significant difference. Intra-observer agreement was almost perfect for all imaging modalities considering the overall staging. Inter-observer agreement for wbMRI and diffusion alone was almost perfect except for bone and lymphatic sites. Overall diagnostic performance of diffusion alone was significantly inferior to those of combined VIBE and diffusion sequences. ConclusionsWhole-body MRI, using diffusion weighted sequences, was a reliable non-radiating imaging for staging of melanoma and offers the same diagnostic performances than combined CT, PET-CT and lymph node US.
引用
收藏
页码:176 / 185
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Whole-body MRI including diffusion-weighted imaging compared to CT for staging of malignant melanoma
    Mosavi, Firas
    Ullenhag, Gustav
    Ahlstrom, Hakan
    UPSALA JOURNAL OF MEDICAL SCIENCES, 2013, 118 (02) : 91 - 97
  • [2] Whole-body 18 FDG PET/CT imaging for lymph node and metastatic staging of conjunctival melanoma
    Kurli, M.
    Chin, K.
    Finger, P. T.
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF OPHTHALMOLOGY, 2008, 92 (04) : 479 - 482
  • [3] Whole-body diffusion-weighted imaging compared with FDG-PET/CT in staging of lymphoma patients
    Abdulqadhr, Goran
    Molin, Daniel
    Astrom, Gunnar
    Suurkula, Madis
    Johansson, Lars
    Hagberg, Hans
    Ahlstrom, Hakan
    ACTA RADIOLOGICA, 2011, 52 (02) : 173 - 180
  • [4] Prospective comparison of 18-FDG PET/CT and whole-body diffusion-weighted MRI in the assessment of multiple myeloma
    Charles Mesguich
    Cyrille Hulin
    Valerie Latrabe
    Axelle Lascaux
    Laurence Bordenave
    Elif Hindié
    Gerald Marit
    Annals of Hematology, 2020, 99 : 2869 - 2880
  • [5] Prospective comparison of 18-FDG PET/CT and whole-body diffusion-weighted MRI in the assessment of multiple myeloma
    Mesguich, Charles
    Hulin, Cyrille
    Latrabe, Valerie
    Lascaux, Axelle
    Bordenave, Laurence
    Hindie, Elif
    Marit, Gerald
    ANNALS OF HEMATOLOGY, 2020, 99 (12) : 2869 - 2880
  • [6] Comparison of whole-body MRI with diffusion-weighted imaging and PET/CT in lymphoma staging
    Kharuzhyk, Siarhei
    Zhavrid, Edward
    Dziuban, Andrei
    Sukolinskaja, Elena
    Kalenik, Olga
    EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY, 2020, 30 (07) : 3915 - 3923
  • [7] Comparison of whole-body MRI with diffusion-weighted imaging and PET/CT in lymphoma staging
    Siarhei Kharuzhyk
    Edward Zhavrid
    Andrei Dziuban
    Elena Sukolinskaja
    Olga Kalenik
    European Radiology, 2020, 30 : 3915 - 3923
  • [8] Staging of Primary Abdominal Lymphomas: Comparison of Whole-Body MRI with Diffusion-Weighted Imaging and 18F-FDG-PET/CT
    Stecco, Alessandro
    Buemi, Francesco
    Quagliozzi, Martina
    Lombardi, Mariangela
    Santagostino, Alberto
    Sacchetti, GianMauro
    Carriero, Alessandro
    GASTROENTEROLOGY RESEARCH AND PRACTICE, 2015, 2015
  • [9] Diagnostic performance of whole-body diffusion-weighted imaging compared to PET-CT plus brain MRI in staging clinically resectable lung cancer
    Usuda, K.
    Matsui, T.
    Motono, N.
    Tanaka, M.
    Machida, Y.
    Matoba, M.
    Watanabe, N.
    Tonami, H.
    Ueda, Y.
    Uramoto, H.
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CANCER, 2017, 72 : S178 - S178
  • [10] Assessment of whole-body MRI including diffusion-weighted sequences in the initial staging of breast cancer patients at high risk of metastases in comparison with PET-CT: a prospective cohort study
    Hottat, Nathalie A.
    Badr, Dominique A.
    Ben Ghanem, Meriem
    Besse-Hammer, Tatiana
    Lecomte, Sylvie M.
    Vansteelandt, Catherine
    Lecomte, Sophie L.
    Khaled, Chirine
    De Grove, Veerle
    Wehbe, Georges Salem
    Cannie, Mieke M.
    Jani, Jacques C.
    EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY, 2024, 34 (01) : 165 - 178