Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Assessment of liver metastases from colorectal adenocarcinoma following chemotherapy: SPIO-MRI versus FDG-PET/CT

Valutazione con SPIO-RM e TC-PET-FDG di metastasi epatiche di adenocarcinoma colorettale dopo chemioterapia

  • Abdominal Radiology / Radiologia Addominale
  • Published:
La radiologia medica Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

This study compared superparamagnetic iron-oxide-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (SPIO-MRI) and combined fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography and computed tomography (FDG-PET/CT) in evaluating liver metastases from colorectal adenocarcinoma following chemotherapy.

Materials and methods

Nineteen patients were included in this retrospective study. SPIO-MRI and PET/CT results were compared with surgery, intraoperative ultrasound and pathology results in 11 patients and with the follow-up in eight patients.

Results

SPIO-MRI and PET/CT identified 125 and 71 metastases, respectively. False negative lesions were 11 for SPIO-MRI and 65 for PET/CT. In the whole study population, the per-lesion analysis of SPIO-MRI and PET/CT showed a sensitivity of 92% and 52% (p<0.001) and the per-segment analysis a sensitivity of 99% and 79% (p<0.001), respectively. In patients who underwent surgery, the per-lesion analysis of SPIO-MRI and PET/CT showed a sensitivity of 85% and 58% (p<0.05) and the per-segment analysis a sensitivity of 97% and 63% (p<0.05), respectively. In patients who underwent follow-up, the per-lesion analysis of SPIO-MRI and PET/CT showed a sensitivity of 97% and 47% (p<0.001) and the per-segment analysis a sensitivity of 100% and 63% (p<0.007), respectively. For lesions ≥15 and <30mm and for lesions <15 mm, SPIO-MRI demonstrated a higher sensitivity than PET/CT (p<0.001).

Conclusions

SPIO-MRI appears superior to PET/CT in evaluating liver metastases from colorectal adenocarcinoma following chemotherapy.

Riassunto

Obiettivo

Scopo del presente lavoro è stato confrontare la superparamagnetic iron oxid-risonanza magnetica (SPIORM) e la tomografia computerizzata associata a tomografia a emissione di positroni con fluorodesossiglucosio (TC-PET-FDG) nella valutazione delle metastasi epatiche di adenocarcinoma colorettale dopo chemioterapia.

Materiali e metodi

Diciannove pazienti sono stati inclusi in questo studio. I risultati della SPIO-RM e della TC-PET sono stati confrontati con la chirurgia, l’ecografia intraoperatoria e l’anatomia patologica in 11 pazienti; con il follow-up in 8 pazienti.

Risultati

La SPIO-RM e la TC-PET hanno individuato 125 e 71 metastasi rispettivamente (falsi negativi: 11 e 65 rispettivamente). Considerando tutti i pazienti: analisi per lesione sensibilità del 92% per SPIO-RM e del 52% per TC-PET (p<0,001), analisi per segmento epatico sensibilità del 99% e del 79% (p<0,001) rispettivamente. Nei pazienti operati: analisi per lesione sensibilità del 85% per SPIO-RM e del 58% per TC-PET (p<0,05), analisi per segmento epatico sensibilità del 97% e del 63% (p<0,05) rispettivamente. Nei pazienti non operati in follow-up: analisi per lesione sensibilità del 97% per SPIO-RM e del 47% per TC-PET (p<0,001), analisi per segmento epatico sensibilità del 100% e del 63% (p<0,007) rispettivamente. La SPIO-RM ha dimostrato una sensibilità superiore alla TC-PET-FDG nella valutazione delle lesioni comprese tra 15 e 30 mm e delle lesioni <15 mm (p<0,001).

Conclusioni

La SPIO-RM appare superiore alla TC-PET nella valutazione delle metastasi epatiche dopo chemioterapia

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References/Bibliografia

  1. Weitz J, Koch M, Debus J et al (2005) Colorectal cancer. Lancet 365:153–165

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Penna C, Nordlinger B (2002) Colorectal metastasis (liver and lung). Surg Clin N Am 82:1075–1090

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Stangl R, Altendorf-Hofmann A, Charnley RM, Scheele J (1994) Factors influencing the natural history of colorectal liver metastases. Lancet 343:1405–1410

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Tomizawa N, Ohwada S, Ogawa T et al (2006) Factors affecting the prognosis of anatomical liver resection for liver metastases from colorectal cancer. Hepatogastroenterology 53:89–93

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Vauthey JN, Zorzi D, Pawlik TM (2005) Making Unresectable Hepatic Colorectal Metastases Resectable-Does It Work? Semin Oncol 32:S118–S122

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Kinkel K, Lu Y, Both M et al (2002) Detection of hepatic metastases from cancers of the gastrointestinal tract by using noninvasive imaging methods (US, CT, MR imaging, PET): a metaanalysis. Radiology 224:748–756

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Schima W, Kulinna C, Langenberger H, Ba-Ssalamah A (2005) Liver metastases of colorectal cancer: US, CT or MR? Cancer Imaging 23:S149–S156

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Semelka RC, Cance WG, Marcos HB, Mauro MA (1999) Liver metastases: comparison of current MR techniques and spiral CT during arterial portography for detection in 20 surgically staged cases. Radiology 213:86–91

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Ward J, Robinson PJ, Guthrie JA, et al (2005) Liver Metastases in Candidates for Hepatic Resection: Comparison of Helical CT and Gadolinium- and SPIO enhanced MR Imaging. Radiology 237:170–180

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Kim YK, Ko SW, Hwang SB et al (2006) Detection and characterization of liver metastases: 16-slice multidetector computed tomography versus superparamagnetic iron oxide-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. Eur Radiol 16:1337–1345

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Kim MJ, Kim JH, Lim JS et al (2004) Detection and characterization of focal hepatic lesions: mangafodipir vs. superparamagnetic iron oxide-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging 20:612–621

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Wiering B, Krabbe PF, Jager GJ et al (2005) The impact of fluor-18-deoxyglucose-positron emission tomography in the management of colorectal liver metastases. Cancer 104:2658–2670

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Bipat S, van Leeuwen MS, Comans EF et al (2005) Colorectal Liver Metastases: CT, MR Imaging, and PET for Diagnosis-Meta-analysis. Radiology 237:123–131

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Sahani DV, Kalva SP, Fischman AJ et al (2005) Detection of liver metastases from adenocarcinoma of the colon and pancreas: comparison of mangafodipir trisodium-enhanced liver MRI and whole-body FDG PET. AJR Am J Roentgenol 185:239–246

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Strotzer M, Gmeinwieser J, Schmidt J et al (1997) Diagnosis of liver metastases from colorectal adenocarcinoma. Comparison of spiral-CTAP combined with intravenous contrast-enhanced spiral-CT and SPIO-enhanced MR combined with plain MR imaging. Acta Radiol 38:986–992

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Kim YK, Lee JM, Kim CS et al (2005) Detection of liver metastases: gadobenate dimeglumine-enhanced three-dimensional dynamic phases and one-hour delayed phase MR imaging versus superparamagnetic iron oxide-enhanced MR imaging. Eur Radiol 15:220–228

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Vogl TJ, Schwarz W, Blume S et al (2003) Preoperative evaluation of malignant liver tumors: comparison of unenhanced and SPIO (Resovist)-enhanced MR imaging with biphasic CTAP and intraoperative US. Eur Radiol 13:262–272

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Conlon R, Jacobs M, Dasgupta D, Lodge JP (2003) The value of intraoperative ultrasound during hepatic resection compared with improved preoperative magnetic resonance imaging. Eur J Ultrasound 16:211–216

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Del Frate C, Bazzocchi M, Mortele KJ et al (2002) Detection of liver metastases: comparison of gadobenate dimeglumine-enhanced and ferumoxides-enhanced MR imaging examinations. Radiology 225:766–772

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Furuhata T, Okita K, Tsuruma T et al (2003) Efficacy of SPIO-MR imaging in the diagnosis of liver metastases from colorectal carcinomas. Dig Surg 20:321–325

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Kim MJ, Kim JH, Choi JY et al (2006) Optimal TE for SPIO-enhanced gradient-recalled echo MRI for the detection of focal hepatic lesions. AJR Am J Roentgenol 187:255–266

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Mawlawi O, Erasmus JJ, Munden RF et al (2006) Quantifying the effect of IV contrast media on integrated PET/CT: clinical evaluation. AJR Am J Roentgenol 186:308–319

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Rappeport ED, Loft A, Berthelsen AK et al (2007) Contrast-enhanced FDGPET/ CT vs. SPIO-enhanced MRI vs. FDG-PET vs. CT in patients with liver metastases from colorectal cancer: a prospective study with intraoperative confirmation. Acta Radiol 48:369–378

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Orlacchio A, Schillaci O, Fusco N et al (2009) Role of PET/CT in the detection of liver metastases from colorectal cancer. Radiol Med 114:571–585

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Onishi H, Murakami T, Kim T et al (2006) Hepatic metastases: detection with multi-detector row CT, SPIO-enhanced MR imaging, and both techniques combined. Radiology 239:131–138

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Leen E, Ceccotti P, Moug SJ et al (2006) Potential value of contrast-enhanced intraoperative ultrasonography during partial hepatectomy for metastases: an essential investigation before resection? Ann Surg 243:236–240

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Ward J, Guthrie JA, Wilson D et al (2003) Colorectal hepatic metastases: detection with SPIO-enhanced breath-hold MR imaging-Comparison of optimized sequences. Radiology 228:709–718

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Erturk SM, Ichikawa T, Fujii H et al (2006) PET imaging for evaluation of metastatic colorectal cancer of the liver. Eur J Radiol 58:229–235

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Kim HJ, Kim KW, Byun JH et al (2006) Comparison of mangafodipir trisodium- and ferucarbotran-enhanced MRI for detection and characterization of hepatic metastases in colorectal cancer patients. AJR Am J Roentgenol 186:1059–1066

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Akhurst T, Kates TJ, Mazumdar M et al (2005) Recent chemotherapy reduces the sensitivity of [18F] fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in the detection of colorectal metastases. J Clin Oncol 23:8713–8716

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Goshen E, Davidson T, Zwas ST, Aderka D (2006) PET/CT in the evaluation of response to treatment of liver metastases from colorectal cancer with bevacizumab and irinotecan. Technol Cancer Res Treat 5:37–43

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Wiering B, Krabbe PF, Dekker HM et al (2007) The role of FDG-PET in the selection of patients with colorectal liver metastases. Ann Surg Oncol 14:771–779

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Patrikeos A, Breidahl W, Robins P (2005) F-18 FDG uptake associated with elastofibroma dorsi. Clin Nucl Med 30:617–618

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Pierce JC 3rd, Henderson R (2004) Hypermetabolism of elastofibroma dorsi on PET-CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol 183:35–37

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Israel O, Yefremov N, Bar-Shalom R et al (2005) PET/CT detection of unexpected gastrointestinal foci of 18FFDG uptake: incidence, localization patterns, and clinical significance. J Nucl Med 46:758–762

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiology, E.O. Ospedali Galliera, Mura delle Cappuccine 14, 16128, Genova, Italy

    L. Bacigalupo

  2. Department of Medical Imaging, CHU de Montpellier, Avenue Augustin Fliche 80, 34295, Montpellier, France

    S. Aufort & B. Gallix

  3. Centre Régional de lutte contre le cancer Val d’Aurelle, rue des Apothicaires 208, 34298, Montpellier, France

    M. C. Eberlé, E. Assenat & M. Ychou

Authors
  1. L. Bacigalupo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. S. Aufort
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. M. C. Eberlé
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. E. Assenat
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. M. Ychou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. B. Gallix
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to L. Bacigalupo.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bacigalupo, L., Aufort, S., Eberlé, M.C. et al. Assessment of liver metastases from colorectal adenocarcinoma following chemotherapy: SPIO-MRI versus FDG-PET/CT. Radiol med 115, 1087–1100 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11547-010-0560-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11547-010-0560-x

Keywords

Parole chiave

Search

Navigation