PANCREATIC TUMORS - EVALUATION WITH ENDOSCOPIC US, CT, AND MR-IMAGING

被引:2
|
作者
MULLER, MF
MEYENBERGER, C
BERTSCHINGER, P
SCHAER, R
MARINCEK, B
机构
[1] UNIV HOSP ZURICH,DEPT RADIOL,CH-8091 ZURICH,SWITZERLAND
[2] UNIV HOSP ZURICH,DEPT INTERNAL MED,GASTROENTEROL UNIT,ZURICH,SWITZERLAND
关键词
ENDOSCOPY; COMPARATIVE STUDIES; NEOPLASMS; STAGING; PANCREAS; CT; 770.12113; MR; 770.12143; 770.121411; 770.121416; 770.31; 770.32; US; 770.12985;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
PURPOSE: To compare the value of endosonography (endoscopic ultrasound [US]), dynamic computed tomography (CT), and magnetic resonance (MR) imaging in the evaluation of pancreatic tumors. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-nine consecutive patients with clinical suspicion of pancreatic tumor underwent endoscopic US (n = 49), CT (n = 46), and MR imaging (n = 25). The final diagnosis of a malignant (n = 22), benign (n = 2), or infammatory (n = 9) tumor, or no (n = 16) tumor was made at surgery (n = 28) and/or a combination of biopsy (n = 9) and 9-24-month follow-up (n = 12). RESULTS: The sensitivity was 94% for endoscopic US, 69% for CT, and 83% for MR imaging. Specificity was 100% for endoscopic US, 64% for CT, and 100% for MR imaging. Accuracy was 96% for endoscopic US, 67% for CT, and 84% for MR imaging. The sensitivity for the detection of tumors less than 3 cm in diameter was 93% for endoscopic US (n = 15), 53% for CT (n = 15), and 67% for MR imaging (n = 12). CONCLUSION: Endoscopic US is more accurate than dynamic CT and MR imaging in the diagnosis of pancreatic tumor, particularly for tumors less than 3 cm in diameter.
引用
收藏
页码:745 / 751
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [11] CYSTIC MASSES OF THE HEAD AND NECK - EVALUATION WITH CT AND MR-IMAGING
    CASILIMAS, MM
    REMLEY, KB
    RADIOLOGY, 1995, 197 : 492 - 492
  • [12] COMPARISON OF ULTRASOUND, CT, AND MR-IMAGING IN THE EVALUATION OF CANDIDATES FOR TIPS
    KRAUS, BB
    ROS, PR
    ABBITT, PL
    KERNS, SR
    SABATELLI, FW
    JMRI-JOURNAL OF MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING, 1995, 5 (05): : 571 - 578
  • [13] CT AND MR-IMAGING EVALUATION OF CHEST-WALL DISORDERS
    KUHLMAN, JE
    BOUCHARDY, L
    FISHMAN, EK
    ZERHOUNI, EA
    RADIOGRAPHICS, 1994, 14 (03) : 571 - 595
  • [14] PANCREATIC ADENOCARCINOMA - CT VERSUS MR-IMAGING IN THE EVALUATION OF RESECTABILITY - REPORT OF THE RADIOLOGY DIAGNOSTIC ONCOLOGY GROUP
    MEGIBOW, AJ
    ZHOU, XH
    ROTTERDAM, H
    FRANCIS, IR
    ZERHOUNI, EA
    BALFE, DM
    WEINREB, JC
    AISEN, A
    KUHLMAN, J
    HEIKEN, JP
    GATSONIS, C
    MCNEIL, BJ
    RADIOLOGY, 1995, 195 (02) : 327 - 332
  • [15] EXAMINATION AND EVALUATION OF SURGICAL MARGINS IN BONE-TUMORS - COMPARATIVE PREOPERATIVE AND POSTOPERATIVE CT AND MR-IMAGING
    SZENDROI, M
    ANTAL, I
    LISZKA, G
    MONOSTORI, Z
    INTERNATIONAL ORTHOPAEDICS, 1993, 17 (02) : 93 - 97
  • [16] PYOMYOSITIS - CHARACTERISTICS AT CT AND MR-IMAGING
    GORDON, BA
    MARTINEZ, S
    COLLINS, AJ
    RADIOLOGY, 1995, 197 (01) : 279 - 286
  • [17] Pancreatic fluid collections prior to intervention: Evaluation with MR imaging compared with CT and US
    Morgan, DE
    Baron, TH
    Smith, JK
    Robbin, MI
    Kenney, PJ
    RADIOLOGY, 1997, 203 (03) : 773 - 778
  • [18] GLENOID LABRAL TEARS - PROSPECTIVE EVALUATION WITH MR-IMAGING, MR ARTHROGRAPHY, AND CT ARTHROGRAPHY
    CHANDNANI, VP
    YEAGER, TD
    DEBERARDINO, T
    CHRISTENSEN, K
    GAGLIARDI, JA
    HEITZ, DR
    BAIRD, DE
    HANSEN, MF
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 1993, 161 (06) : 1229 - 1235
  • [19] EVALUATION OF TIBIAL PLATEAU FRACTURES - EFFICACY OF MR-IMAGING COMPARED WITH CT
    KODE, L
    LIEBERMAN, JM
    MOTTA, AO
    WILBER, JH
    VASEN, A
    YAGAN, R
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 1994, 163 (01) : 141 - 147
  • [20] PANCREATIC NEOPLASMS - MR-IMAGING AND PATHOLOGICAL CORRELATION
    HELMBERGER, TK
    BUETOW, PC
    MERGO, PJ
    HELMBERGER, RC
    RADIOLOGY, 1995, 197 : 500 - 501