![](/images/graphics-bg.png)
Magnetic Resonance of Rectal Cancer Response to Therapy: An Image Quality Comparison between 3.0 and 1.5 Tesla
Joint Authors
Ciolina, Maria
Caruso, Damiano
Zerunian, Marta
De Santis, Domenico
Biondi, Tommaso
Paolantonio, Pasquale
Rengo, Marco
Bellini, Davide
Ferrari, Riccardo
Lucertini, Elena
Polici, Michela
Iannicelli, Elsa
Tombolini, Vincenzo
Laghi, Andrea
Source
Issue
Vol. 2020, Issue 2020 (31 Dec. 2020), pp.1-8, 8 p.
Publisher
Hindawi Publishing Corporation
Publication Date
2020-10-12
Country of Publication
Egypt
No. of Pages
8
Main Subjects
Abstract EN
Purpose.
To evaluate signal intensity (SI) differences between 3.0 T and 1.5 T on T2-weighted (T2w), diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI), and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) in rectal cancer pre-, during, and postneoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT).
Materials and Methods.
22 patients with locally advanced rectal cancer were prospectively enrolled.
All patients underwent T2w, DWI, and ADC pre-, during, and post-CRT on both 3.0 T MRI and 1.5 T MRI.
A radiologist drew regions of interest (ROIs) of the tumor and obturator internus muscle on the selected slice to evaluate SI and relative SI (rSI).
Additionally, a subanalysis evaluating the SI before and after-CRT (∆SI pre-post) in complete responder patients (CR) and nonresponder patients (NR) on T2w, DWI, and ADC was performed.
Results.
Significant differences were observed for T2w and DWI on 3.0 T MRI compared to 1.5 T MRI pre-, during, and post-CRT (all P<0.001), whereas no significant differences were reported for ADC among all controls (all P>0.05).
rSI showed no significant differences in all the examinations for all sequences (all P>0.05).
∆SI showed significant differences between 3.0 T and 1.5 T MRI for DWI-∆SI in CR and NR (188.39±166.90 vs.
30.45±21.73 and 169.70±121.87 vs.
22.00±31.29, respectively, all P 0.02) and ADC-∆SI for CR (−0.58±0.27 vs.
−0.21±0.24P value 0.02), while no significant differences were observed for ADC-∆SI in NR and both CR and NR for T2w-∆SI.
Conclusion.
T2w-SI and DWI-SI showed significant differences for 3.0 T compared to 1.5 T in all three controls, while ADCSI showed no significant differences in all three controls on both field strengths.
rSI was comparable for 3.0 T and 1.5 T MRI in rectal cancer patients; therefore, rectal cancer patients can be assessed both at 3.0 T MRI and 1.5 T MRI.
However, a significant DWI-∆SI and ADC-∆SI on 3.0 T in CR might be interpreted as a better visual assessment in discriminating response to therapy compared to 1.5 T.
Further investigations should be performed to confirm future possible clinical application.
American Psychological Association (APA)
Caruso, Damiano& Zerunian, Marta& De Santis, Domenico& Biondi, Tommaso& Paolantonio, Pasquale& Rengo, Marco…[et al.]. 2020. Magnetic Resonance of Rectal Cancer Response to Therapy: An Image Quality Comparison between 3.0 and 1.5 Tesla. BioMed Research International،Vol. 2020, no. 2020, pp.1-8.
https://search.emarefa.net/detail/BIM-1138319
Modern Language Association (MLA)
Caruso, Damiano…[et al.]. Magnetic Resonance of Rectal Cancer Response to Therapy: An Image Quality Comparison between 3.0 and 1.5 Tesla. BioMed Research International No. 2020 (2020), pp.1-8.
https://search.emarefa.net/detail/BIM-1138319
American Medical Association (AMA)
Caruso, Damiano& Zerunian, Marta& De Santis, Domenico& Biondi, Tommaso& Paolantonio, Pasquale& Rengo, Marco…[et al.]. Magnetic Resonance of Rectal Cancer Response to Therapy: An Image Quality Comparison between 3.0 and 1.5 Tesla. BioMed Research International. 2020. Vol. 2020, no. 2020, pp.1-8.
https://search.emarefa.net/detail/BIM-1138319
Data Type
Journal Articles
Language
English
Notes
Includes bibliographical references
Record ID
BIM-1138319