Lauenstein Thomas C, Goehde Susanne C, Herborn Christoph U, Goyen Matthias, Oberhoff Carsten, Debatin Jörg F, Ruehm Stefan G, Barkhausen Jörg
Departments of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology and Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Hospital Essen, Hufelandstrasse 55, D-45122 Essen, Germany.
Radiology. 2004 Oct;233(1):139-48. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2331030777. Epub 2004 Aug 18.
To compare the results of whole-body magnetic resonance (MR) imaging with staging based on computed tomographic (CT), dedicated MR imaging, and nuclear scintigraphic results as standard of reference.
Fifty-one patients with known malignant tumors were included in the study. Patients were placed on a rolling table platform capable of moving the patient rapidly through the isocenter of the magnet bore. The thorax and the abdomen were imaged by using fast breath-hold T2-weighted sequences in the transverse plane. After intravenous administration of a paramagnetic contrast agent, three-dimensional gradient-echo data sets were collected in five stations and covered the body from the skull to the knees. Location and size of cerebral, pulmonary, hepatic, and osseous metastases were documented by two experienced radiologists. Whole-body MR imaging findings were compared with results obtained at skeletal scintigraphy, CT, and dedicated MR imaging.
The mean examination time for whole-body MR imaging was 14.5 minutes. All cerebral, pulmonary, and hepatic metastases greater than 6 mm in diameter could be identified with whole-body MR imaging. Small pulmonary metastases were missed with MR imaging, which did not change therapeutic strategies, but MR imaging depicted a single hepatic metastasis that was missed with CT. Skeletal scintigraphy depicted osseous metastases in 21 patients, whereas whole-body MR imaging revealed osseous metastases in 24 patients. The additional osseous metastases seen with MR imaging were confirmed at follow-up examinations but did not result in a change in therapy. Whole-body MR imaging performed on a per-patient basis revealed sensitivity and specificity values of 100%.
Whole-body MR imaging for the evaluation of metastases compared well with the reference techniques for cerebral, pulmonary, and hepatic lesions. Whole-body MR imaging was more sensitive in the detection of hepatic and osseous metastases than were the reference techniques.
将全身磁共振（MR）成像结果与基于计算机断层扫描（CT）、专用MR成像及核素闪烁成像结果作为参考标准的分期结果进行比较。
51例已知患有恶性肿瘤的患者纳入本研究。患者置于能够使患者快速通过磁体孔等中心的滚动检查台平台上。采用快速屏气T2加权序列在横断面成像胸部和腹部。静脉注射顺磁性对比剂后，在五个部位采集三维梯度回波数据集，覆盖从颅骨至膝盖的身体范围。两名经验丰富的放射科医生记录脑、肺、肝及骨转移瘤的位置和大小。将全身MR成像结果与骨骼闪烁成像、CT及专用MR成像结果进行比较。
全身MR成像的平均检查时间为14.5分钟。全身MR成像能够识别所有直径大于6mm的脑、肺及肝转移瘤。MR成像漏诊了一些小的肺转移瘤，这并未改变治疗策略，但MR成像显示出一个CT漏诊的肝转移瘤。骨骼闪烁成像显示21例患者存在骨转移，而全身MR成像显示24例患者存在骨转移。MR成像发现的额外骨转移在随访检查中得到证实，但未导致治疗改变。基于每位患者进行的全身MR成像显示敏感性和特异性值均为100%。
用于评估转移瘤的全身MR成像与用于脑、肺及肝病变的参考技术相比效果良好。全身MR成像在检测肝转移和骨转移方面比参考技术更敏感。
