MR staging of rectal cancer: Comparison between the 2012 and 2016 European Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology (ESGAR) Guidelines.

PURPOSE

To compare the adherence of the interpretation and reporting staging system, respectively proposed in the 2012 and 2016 European Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology (ESGAR) Guidelines for Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) staging of rectal cancer, focusing on the improvement offered by the criteria introduced by 2016 ESGAR guidelines.

METHOD

Fifty-six patients affected by rectal cancer were included; 25/56 patients underwent upfront surgery; 31 underwent to neo-adjuvant chemo-radiotherapy before surgery. All patients underwent 3 T MRI examination for local staging. All MR exams were evaluated by two radiologists with 20- and 4-years' experience, who were blinded to each other; the T and N stages, the Mesorectal Fascia (MRF) status and the Extramural Vascular Invasion (EMVI) were assessed according to both 2012 and 2016 ESGAR guidelines. The correlation between radiological and pathological findings, as well as the MRI staging were evaluated.

RESULTS

As to the expert reviewer, no significant differences were found by comparing the MR T and N stages, T and N restaging, MRF status and EMVI according to 2012 and 2016 ESGAR guidelines. As to the 4-years' experience radiologist the MR staging agreement between 2012 and 2016 guidelines was "moderate" in N-stage evaluation and "fair" in T-restaging evaluation. No significant discrepancies were found for other parameters.

CONCLUSIONS

MRI is a reliable method in rectal cancer staging/restaging. The assessment of T-restaging is improved by adopting the 2016 ESGAR guidelines, especially for non-expert readers; this result could be justified by the introduction of diffusion-weighted imaging. On the contrary, the newest guidelines do not improve the diagnostic performance in assessing nodal staging and restaging.