Department of Radiology, Peking University People's Hospital, 11 Xizhimen S St, Xicheng District Beijing 100044, China.
Department of Pathology, Peking University People's Hospital, Beijing, China.
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2019 Nov;213(5):1081-1090. doi: 10.2214/AJR.19.21383. Epub 2019 Aug 6.
The purpose of this study was to analyze causes of discrepancies between restaging MRI and pathologic findings in the assessment of morphologic indicators of tumor response in patients with rectal cancer who have undergone neoadjuvant treatment. MRI and pathologic data from 57 consecutively registered patients who underwent neoadjuvant treatment and total mesorectal excision between August 2015 and July 2018 were retrospectively analyzed. The sensitivity and specificity of restaging MRI in determining tumor regression grade, T category, N category, circumferential resection margin, and extramural vascular invasion were calculated with pathologic results as the reference standard. One-by-one comparisons between MRI and pathologic findings were conducted to identify causes of discrepancies. The sensitivity of MRI in determining tumor regression grades 3-5 was 77.1%; T3 and T4 category, 100.0%; node-positive disease, 75.0%; circumferential resection margin, 87.5%; and extramural vascular invasion, 91.7%. The specificity values were 72.7%, 62.5%, 70.7%, 85.7%, and 64.4%. Overstaging was mainly caused by misinterpretation of fibrotic areas as residual tumor. Inflammatory cell infiltration could appear as high signal intensity in fibrotic areas on DW images, an appearance similar to that of residual tumor. Edematous mucosa and submucosa adjacent to the tumor and muscularis propria could also be mistaken for residual tumor because of their intermediate signal intensity on T2-weighted MR images. MRI was prone to overstaging of disease. Discrepancies between MRI and pathologic findings were mainly caused by misinterpretation of fibrosis. Inflammatory cell infiltration, pure mucin, edematous mucosa and submucosa adjacent to the tumor, and muscularis propria could also be misinterpreted as residual tumor.
本研究旨在分析直肠癌新辅助治疗后评估肿瘤形态学反应的形态学指标时,重新分期 MRI 与病理结果之间差异的原因。回顾性分析了 2015 年 8 月至 2018 年 7 月连续登记的 57 例接受新辅助治疗和全直肠系膜切除术的患者的 MRI 和病理数据。以病理结果为参考标准,计算重新分期 MRI 确定肿瘤消退分级、T 分期、N 分期、环周切缘和外膜血管侵犯的灵敏度和特异性。对 MRI 与病理结果进行逐一比较,以确定差异的原因。MRI 确定肿瘤消退分级 3-5 的灵敏度为 77.1%;T3 和 T4 期为 100.0%;淋巴结阳性疾病为 75.0%;环周切缘为 87.5%;外膜血管侵犯为 91.7%。特异性值分别为 72.7%、62.5%、70.7%、85.7%和 64.4%。过度分期主要是由于将纤维区域错误地解释为残留肿瘤。在 DW 图像上,纤维化区域的炎症细胞浸润可能表现为高信号强度,与残留肿瘤的表现相似。肿瘤相邻的水肿黏膜和黏膜下层以及固有肌层也可能因其在 T2 加权 MR 图像上的中等信号强度而被误认为是残留肿瘤。MRI 容易过度分期疾病。MRI 与病理结果之间的差异主要是由于对纤维化的误解。炎症细胞浸润、单纯黏蛋白、肿瘤相邻的水肿黏膜和黏膜下层以及固有肌层也可能被错误地解释为残留肿瘤。