4.7 Article

Whole-Body MRI, Including Diffusion-Weighted Imaging, for Staging Lymphoma: Comparison With CT in a Prospective Multicenter Study

Journal

JOURNAL OF MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING
Volume 40, Issue 1, Pages 26-36

Publisher

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1002/jmri.24356

Keywords

CT; Hodgkin; lymphoma; staging; whole-body MRI

Funding

  1. Dutch Organization for Health Research and Development (ZonMw), Health Care Efficiency Research programme [80-82310-98-08012]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose: To compare whole-body magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), including diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI), to computed tomography (CT) for staging newly diagnosed lymphoma. Materials and Methods: In all, 108 patients with newly diagnosed lymphoma prospectively underwent whole-body MRI (T1-weighted and T2-weighted short inversion time inversion recovery [n = 108], and DWI [n = 104]) and CT. Ann Arbor stages were assigned according to whole-body MRI and CT findings. Staging disagreements were resolved using bone marrow biopsy, FDG-PET, and follow-up studies. The results were descriptively analyzed. Results: Staging results of whole-body MRI without DWI were equal to those of CT in 66.6%, higher in 24.1%, and lower in 9.3%, with correct/incorrect/unresolved higher staging and incorrect/unresolved lower staging relative to CT in 15/7/4 and 9/1 patient(s), respectively. Staging results of whole-body MRI with DWI were equal to those of CT in 65.4%, higher in 27.9%, and lower in 6.7%, with correct/incorrect/unresolved higher staging and incorrect/unresolved lower staging relative to CT in 18/6/5 and 6/1 patient(s), respectively. Conclusion: The results of this study suggest that whole-body MRI staging equals CT staging in the majority of patients with newly diagnosed lymphoma. No advantage of additional DWI was demonstrated. Whole-body MRI can be a good alternative to CT if radiation exposure should be avoided.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available