Uterine tumors: Comparison of 3D versus 2D T2-weighted turbo spin-echo MR imaging at 3.0 T-initial experience

Radiology

Volumn 258, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 154-163

  Hori, Masatoshi ^a   Kim, Tonsok ^a   Onishi, Hiromitsu ^a   Ueguchi, Takashi ^b   Tatsumi, Mitsuaki ^b   Nakamoto, Atsushi ^a   Tsuboyama, Takahiro ^a   Tomoda, Kaname ^b   Tomiyama, Noriyuki ^a  

^a OSAKA UNIVERSITY GRADUATE SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (Japan)

^b OSAKA UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Japan)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CANCER STAGING; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC TEST ACCURACY STUDY; ENDOMETRIUM BIOPSY; ENDOMETRIUM CARCINOMA; FEMALE; GLUTEUS MAXIMUS MUSCLE; HUMAN; IMAGE QUALITY; LEIOMYOMA; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MCNEMAR TEST; MYOMETRIUM; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE SCANNER; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; SIGNAL NOISE RATIO; STUDENT T TEST; UTERINE CERVIX BIOPSY; UTERINE CERVIX CARCINOMA; UTERUS CARCINOMA; UTERUS TUMOR; WILCOXON SIGNED RANKS TEST;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; CARCINOMA; CONTRAST MEDIA; FEMALE; HUMANS; IMAGE INTERPRETATION, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; IMAGING, THREE-DIMENSIONAL; LEIOMYOMA; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MIDDLE AGED; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; STATISTICS, NONPARAMETRIC; UTERINE NEOPLASMS;

EID: 78650619314     PISSN: 00338419     EISSN: 15271315     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1148/radiol.10100866     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. American Cancer Society. Estimated new cancer cases and deaths by sex, US, 2009. In: Cancer facts and figures 2009. Atlanta, Ga: American Cancer Society, 2009;5.
2. Koyama T, Tamai K, Togashi K. Staging of carcinoma of the uterine cervix and endometrium. Eur Radiol 2007;57(8):2009-2019.
3. Evans P, Brunsell S. Uterine fibroid tumors: diagnosis and treatment. Am Fam Physician 2007;55(10):1503-1508.
4. Jha RC, Ascher SM, Imaoka I, Spies JB. Symptomatic fibroleiomyomata: MR imaging of the uterus before and after uterine arterial embolization. Radiology 2000;517(1):228-235.
5. Imaoka I, Wada A, Matsuo M, Yoshida M, Kitagaki H, Sugimura K. MR imaging of disorders associated with female infertility: use in diagnosis, treatment, and management. RadioGraphics 2003;53(6):1401-1421.
6. Merkle EM, Dale BM. Abdominal MRI at 3.0 T: the basics revisited. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2006;586(6):1524-1532.
7. Torricelli P, Ferraresi S, Fiocchi F, et al. 3-T MRI in the preoperative evaluation of depth of myometrial infiltration in endometrial cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2008;590(2):489-495.
8. Hori M, Kim T, Murakami T, et al. MR imaging of endometrial carcinoma for preoperative staging at 3.0 T: comparison with imaging at 1.5 T. J Magn Reson Imaging 2009;50(3):621-630.
9. Hori M, Kim T, Murakami T, et al. Uterine cervical carcinoma: preoperative staging with 3.0-T MR imaging-comparison with 1.5-T MR imaging. Radiology 2009;551(1):96-104.
10. Morakkabati-Spitz N, Schild HH, Kuhl CK, et al. Female pelvis: MR imaging at 3.0 T with sensitivity encoding and flip-angle sweep technique. Radiology 2006;541(2):538-545.
11. Mugler JP 3rd, Bao S, Mulkern RV, et al. Optimized single-slab three-dimensional spinecho MR imaging of the brain. Radiology 2000;516(3):891-899.
12. Lichy MP, Wietek BM, Mugler JP 3rd, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging of the body trunk using a single-slab, 3-dimensional, T2-weighted turbo-spin-echo sequence with high sampling efficiency (SPACE) for high spatial resolution imaging: initial clinical experiences. Invest Radiol 2005;50(12):754-760.
13. Ristow O, Steinbach L, Sabo G, et al. Isotropic 3D fast spin-echo imaging versus standard 2D imaging at 3.0 T of the knee: image quality and diagnostic performance. Eur Radiol 2009;59(5):1263-1272.
14. Stevens KJ, Busse RF, Han E, et al. Ankle: isotropic MR imaging with 3D-FSE-cube-initial experience in healthy volunteers. Radiology 2008;549(3):1026-1033.
15. Kim H, Lim JS, Choi JY, et al. Rectal cancer: comparison of accuracy of local-regional staging with two-and three-dimensional preoperative 3-T MR imaging. Radiology 2010;554(2):485-492.
16. Rosenkrantz AB, Neil J, Kong X, et al. Prostate cancer: comparison of 3D T2-weighted with conventional 2D T2-weighted imaging for image quality and tumor detection. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2010;594(2):446-452.
17. Agrawal G, Riherd JM, Busse RF, Hinshaw JL, Sadowski EA. Evaluation of uterine anomalies: 3D FRFSE cube versus standard 2D FRFSE. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2009;593(6):W558-W562.
18. Rosenkrantz AB, Patel JM, Babb JS, Storey P, Hecht EM. Liver MRI at 3 T using a respiratory-triggered time-efficient 3D T2-weighted technique: impact on artifacts and image quality. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2010;594(3):634-641.
19. Heverhagen JT. Noise measurement and estimation in MR imaging experiments. Radiology 2007;545(3):638-639.
20. Cornfeld DM, Israel G, McCarthy SM, Weinreb JC. Pelvic imaging using a T1W fatsuppressed three-dimensional dual echo Dixon technique at 3T. J Magn Reson Imaging 2008;58(1):121-127.
21. Pecorelli S. Revised FIGO staging for carcinoma of the vulva, cervix, and endometrium. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2009;505(2):103-104.
22. Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977;53(1):159-174.
23. NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines): cervical cancer (V.1.2010). National Comprehensive Cancer Network Web site. http://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician-gls/f-guidelines.asp. Published October 20, 2009. Accessed April 17, 2010.
24. Grigsby PW, Perez CA, Kuten A, et al. Clinical stage I endometrial cancer: prognostic factors for local control and distant metastasis and implications of the new FIGO surgical staging system. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1992;52(5):905-911.
25. Creasman WT, Morrow CP, Bundy BN, Homesley HD, Graham JE, Heller PB. Surgical pathologic spread patterns of endometrial cancer: a Gynecologic Oncology Group Study. Cancer 1987;50(8 suppl):2035-2041.
26. Hricak H, Lacey CG, Sandles LG, Chang YC, Winkler ML, Stern JL. Invasive cervical carcinoma: comparison of MR imaging and surgical findings. Radiology 1988;566(3):623-631.
27. Togashi K, Nishimura K, Sagoh T, et al. Carcinoma of the cervix: staging with MR imaging. Radiology 1989;571(1):245-251.
28. Bipat S, Glas AS, van der Velden J, Zwinderman AH, Bossuyt PM, Stoker J. Computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging in staging of uterine cervical carcinoma: a systematic review. Gynecol Oncol 2003;51(1):59-66.