Johnson A J, Ying J, El Gammal T, Timmerman R D, Kim R Y, Littenberg B
Neuroradiology Division, Department of Radiology, Indiana University, Indianapolis, IN 46202, USA.
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2007 Jan;28(1):32-7.
To determine which MR imaging sequences are necessary to assess for spinal metastases.
Hypothetical MR imaging interpretations and management plans were made prospectively for consecutive adult cases acquired retrospectively. Standardized MR imaging protocols were independently interpreted by 2 neuroradiologists. MR imaging protocol types varied: 1) T1-weighted images only; 2) T1-weighted and T2-weighted images; 3) T1-weighted and postcontrast T1-weighted images; and 4) T1- and T2-weighted images and postcontrast T1-weighted images. Hypothetical management plans were created by 2 radiation oncologists. Logit model was used to investigate the effect of MR imaging protocol type on the probability of recommending radiation therapy (RT). Mixed effect models were used to investigate whether median spinal level or total number of spinal levels of planned RT was associated with MR imaging protocol type.
Thirty-one subjects were evaluated, each with multiple scan interpretations. Logit model showed that neither MR imaging protocol type nor neuroradiologist reader affected the probability that the oncologist would recommend RT (all P > .50). Mixed models showed that neither ML nor NL was affected by MR imaging protocol type or by neuroradiologist reader (all P > .12).
Although MR imaging is known to be the most useful diagnostic test in suspected spinal cord compression, which particular MR images are necessary remain unclear. Compared with T1-weighted images alone, the additional use of T2-weighted and/or postcontrast T1-weighted sequences did not significantly affect the probability that RT would be recommended or the levels that would be chosen for RT in our study. Our data suggest that unenhanced T1-weighted images may be sufficient for evaluation of possible cord compression.
确定评估脊柱转移瘤需要哪些磁共振成像(MR)序列。
对回顾性采集的连续成年病例进行前瞻性的假设性MR成像解读及治疗方案制定。由2名神经放射科医生独立解读标准化MR成像方案。MR成像方案类型各异:1)仅T1加权像;2)T1加权像和T2加权像;3)T1加权像和增强后T1加权像;4)T1加权像、T2加权像和增强后T1加权像。由2名放射肿瘤学家制定假设性治疗方案。采用逻辑模型研究MR成像方案类型对推荐放射治疗(RT)概率的影响。采用混合效应模型研究计划RT的脊柱节段中位数或脊柱节段总数是否与MR成像方案类型相关。
对31名受试者进行了评估,每人有多次扫描解读。逻辑模型显示,MR成像方案类型和神经放射科医生阅片者均不影响肿瘤学家推荐RT的概率(所有P>.50)。混合模型显示,MR成像方案类型或神经放射科医生阅片者均不影响ML和NL(所有P>.12)。
尽管已知MR成像在疑似脊髓压迫中是最有用的诊断检查,但哪些特定的MR图像是必需的仍不清楚。在我们的研究中,与单独的T1加权像相比,额外使用T2加权像和/或增强后T1加权序列并未显著影响推荐RT的概率或选择进行RT的节段。我们的数据表明,未增强的T1加权像可能足以评估可能的脊髓压迫。