Whole-body magnetic resonance imaging and positron emission tomography-computed tomography in oncology

Topics in Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Volumn 18, Issue 3, 2007, Pages 193-202

  Schmidt, Gerwin P ^a   Kramer, Harald ^a   Reiser, Maximilian F ^a   Glaser, Christian ^a  

^a LUDWIG MAXIMILIANS UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

Author keywords

Computed tomography; Magnetic resonance imaging; Oncology; Positron emission tomography; Whole body

Indexed keywords

FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F 18;

BONE MARROW SCINTISCANNING; BONE METASTASIS; BONE SCINTISCANNING; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER SCREENING; CANCER STAGING; CELL INFILTRATION; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; GLUCOSE METABOLISM; HUMAN; LYMPH NODE; METASTASIS; MONITORING; MULTIPLE MYELOMA; ONCOLOGY; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PATHOLOGICAL ANATOMY; PATIENT CARE; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY OF LIFE; REVIEW; SECONDARY PREVENTION; TECHNICAL AID; WHOLE BODY MRI;

HUMANS; IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MEDICAL ONCOLOGY; NEOPLASMS; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; SUBTRACTION TECHNIQUE; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED; WHOLE BODY IMAGING;

EID: 34548416658     PISSN: 08993459     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/RMR.0b013e318093e6bo     Document Type: Review

References (47)

1. Semelka RC, Worawattanakul S, Kelekis NL, et al. Liver lesion detection, characterization, and effect on patient management: comparison of single-phase spiral CT and current MR techniques. J Magn Reson Imaging. 1997;7:1040-1047.
2. Steinborn M, Heuck AF, Tiling R, et al. Whole-body bone marrow MRI in patients with metastatic disease to the skeletal system. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 1999;23:123-129.
3. Pelosi E, Messa C, Sironi S, et al. Value of integrated PET/CT for lesion localisation in cancer patients: a comparative study. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2004;31:932-939.
4. Cohade C, Osman M, Leal J, et al. Direct comparison of 18F-FDG-PET and PET-CT in patients with colorectal carcinoma. J Nucl Med. 2003;44:797-803.
5. Brix G, Lechel U, Glatting G, et al. Radiation exposure of patients undergoing whole-body dual-modality 18F-FDG PET/CT examinations. J Nucl Med. 2005;46:608-613.
6. Golder WA. Lymph node diagnosis in oncologic imaging: a dilemma still waiting to be solved. Onkologie. 2004;27:194-199.
7. Beyer T, Townsend DW, Brun T, et al. A combined PET/CT scanner for clinical oncology. J Nucl Med. 2000;41:1369-1379.
8. Lardinois D, Weder W, Hany TF, et al. Staging of non-small-cell cancer with integrated positron emission tomography and computed tomography. N Engl J Med. 2003;348:2500-2507.
9. Cohade C, Osman M, Leal J, et al. Direct comparison of 18F-FDG-PET and PET-CT in patients with colorectal carcinoma. J Nucl Med. 2003;44:1797-1803.
10. Wechalekar K, Sharma B, Cook G. PET/CT in oncology - a major advance. Clin Radiol. 2005;60:1143-1155.
11. Mulkens TH, Bellinck P, Baeyaert M, et al. Use of an automatic exposure control mechanism for dose optimization in multi-detector row CT examinations: clinical evaluation. Radiology. 2005;237:213-223.
12. Barkhausen J, Quick HH, Lauenstein T, et al. Whole-body MR imaging in 30 seconds with real-time true FISP and a continuously rolling table platform: feasibility study. Radiology. 2001;220:252-256.
13. Lauenstein T, Goehde S, Herborn C, et al. Three-dimensional volumetric interpolated breath-hold MR imaging for whole-body tumor staging in less than 15 minutes. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2002;179:445-449.
14. Schlemmer HP, Schäfer J, Pfannenberg C, et al. Fast whole-body assessment of metastatic disease using a novel magnetic resonance imaging system: initial experiences. Invest Radiol. 2005;40:64-71.
15. Schmidt GP, Baur-Melnyk A, Herzog P, et al. High-resolution whole-body MRI tumor staging with the use of parallel imaging versus dual modality PET-CT: experience on a 32-channel system. Invest Radiol. 2005;40:743-753.
16. Walker R, Kessar P, Blanchard R, et al. Turbo STIR magnetic resonance imaging as a whole-body screening tool for metastases in patients with breast carcinoma: preliminary clinical experience. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2000;11:343-350.
17. Eibel R, Herzog P, Dietrich O, et al. Detection of pulmonary abnormalities in immunocompromised patients: comparative detection with parallel acquisition MR imaging and thin-section helical-CT. Radiology. 2006;241:880-891.
18. Zenge MO, Ladd ME, Vogt FM, et al. Whole-body magnetic resonance imaging featuring moving table continuous data acquisition with high-precision position feedback. Magn Reson Med. 2005;54:707-711.
19. Goehde SC, Hunold P, Vogt FM, et al. Full-body cardiovascular and tumor MRI for early detection of disease: feasibility and initial experience in 298 subjects. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2005;184:598-611.
20. Ajaj W, Pelster G, Treichel U, et al. Dark lumen magnetic resonance colonography: comparison with conventional colonoscopy for the detection of colorectal pathology. Gut. 2003;52:1738-1743.
21. Antoch G, Vogt FM, Freudenberg LS, et al. Whole-body dual-modality PET/CT and whole-body MRI for tumor staging in oncology. JAMA. 2003;290:3199-3206.
22. Antoch G, Stattaus J, Nemat AT, et al. Non small-cell lung cancer: dual-modality PET-CT in preoperative staging. Radiology. 2003;229:526-533.
23. Antoch G, Saoudi N, Kuehl H, et al. Accuracy of whole-body dual-modality fluorine-18-2-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography and computed tomography (FDG-PET/CT) for tumor staging in solid tumors: comparison with CT and PET. J Clin Oncol. 2004;22:4357-4368.
24. Golder WA. Lymph node diagnosis in oncologic imaging: a dilemma still waiting to be solved. Onkologie. 2004;27:194-199.
25. Pieterman RM, Van Putten JW, Meuzelaar JJ, et al. Preoperative staging of non-small-cell lung cancer with positron-emission tomography. N Engl J Med. 2000;343:254-261.
26. Brennan DD, Gleeson T, Coate LE, et al. A comparison of whole-body MRI and CT for the staging of lymphoma. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2005;185:711-716.
27. Takahara T, Imay Y, Yamashita T, et al. Diffusion weighted whole body imaging with background body signal suppression (DWIBS): technical improvement using free breathing, STIR and high resolution 3D display. Radiat Med. 2004;22:275-282.
28. Ichikawa T, Erturk S, Motosuqi U, et al. Virtual PET-MRI as a novel oncologic imaging of the body: principles, techniques, and clinical applications [Abstract]. Article code 1330BP-e. Presented at Radiological Society of North America exhibit, November 27-December 2, 2005.
29. Will O, Purkayastha S, Chan C, et al. Diagnostic precision of nanoparticle-enhanced MRI for lymph-node metastases: a meta-analysis. Lancet Oncol. 2005;7:52-60.
30. Saksena AM, Saokar A,Harisinghani MG. Lymphotropic nanoparticle enhanced MR imaging (LNMRI) technique for lymph node staging. Eur Radiol. 2006;58:367-374
31. Schlemmer HP, Schäfer J, Pfannenberg C, et al. Fast whole-body assessment of metastatic disease using a novel magnetic resonance imaging system: initial experiences. Invest Radiol. 2005;40:64-71.
32. Mehta RC, Marks MP, Hinks RS, et al. MR evaluation of vertebral metastases: T1-weighted short-inversion time-inversion recovery, fast spin echo, and inversion-recovery fast spin-echo sequences. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 1995;16:281-288.
33. Mahnken A, Wildberger JE, Adam G, et al. Is there a need for contrast-enhanced T1-weighted MRI of the spine after inconspicuous short τ inversion recovery imaging? Eur Radiol. 2005;15:1387-1392.
34. Cheran SK, Herndon JE, Patz EF. Comparison of whole-body FDG-PET to bone scan for detection of bone metastases in patients with a new diagnosis of lung cancer. Lung Cancer. 2003;44:317-325.
35. Daldrup-Link HE, Franzius C, Link TM, et al. Whole-body MR imaging for detection of bone metastases in children and young adults: comparison with skeletal scintigraphy and FDG PET. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2001;177:229-236.
36. Imamura F, Kuriyama K, Seto T, et al. Detection of bone marrow metastases of small cell lung cancer with magnetic resonance imaging: early diagnosis before destruction of osseous structure and implications for staging. Lung Cancer. 2000;27:189-197.
37. Krishnamurthy GT, Tubis M, Hiss J, et al. Distribution pattern of metastatic bone disease. JAMA. 1977;237:837-842.
38. Engelhard K, Hollenbach HP, Wohlfahrt K, et al. Comparison of whole-body MRI with automated moving table technique and bone scintigraphy for screening for bone metastases in patients with breast cancer. Eur Radiol. 2004;14:99-105.
39. Schmidt GP, Schoenberg SO, Schmid R, et al. Screening for bone metastases: whole-body MRI using a 32-channel system versus dual-modality PET-CT. Eur Radiol. 2006;17:939-949. Epub September 2, 2006.
40. Cook GJ, Houston S, Rubens R, et al. Detection of bone metastases in breast cancer by 18-FDG-PET: differing metabolic activity in osteoblastic and osteolytic lesions. J Clin Oncol. 1998;16:3375-3379.
41. Durie BGM, Salmon SE. A clinical staging system for multiple myeloma: correlation of measured myeloma cell mass with presenting clinical features, response to treatment, and survival. Cancer. 1975;36:842-854.
42. Lecouvet FE, Malghem J, Michaux L, et al. Skeletal survey in advanced multiple myeloma: radiographic versus MR imaging survey. Br J Haematol. 1999;106:35-39.
43. Baur A, Stäbler A, Bartl R, et al. MRI gadolinium enhancement of bone marrow: age related changes in normals and in diffuse neoplastic infiltration. Skeletal Radiol. 1997;26:414-418.
44. Ghanem N, Lohrmann C, Engelhardt M, et al. Whole-body MRI in the detection of bone marrow infiltration in patients with plasma cell neoplasms in comparison to the radiological skeletal survey. Eur Radiol. 2006;16:1005-1014.
45. Buhmann S, Schoenberg S, Becker CR, et al. Whole body imaging approach of patients with multiple myeloma: comparing MR imaging with MDCT. Eur Radiol. 2006;18(suppl 1):138.
46. Nanni C, Zamagni E, Farsad M, et al. Role of 18F-FDG PET/CT in the assessment of bone involvement in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: preliminary results. Eur J Nucl Med. 2006;33:525-531.
47. Baur A, Stäbler A, Nagel D, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging as a supplement for the clinical staging system of Durie and Salmon? Cancer. 2002;95:1334-1345.