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
  • [41] MR-IMAGING OF INTRACRANIAL GERM-CELL TUMORS
    MOON, WK
    CHANG, KH
    KIM, I
    HAN, MH
    YEON, KM
    HAN, MC
    RADIOLOGY, 1995, 197 : 484 - 484
  • [42] BREAST-TUMORS - COMPARATIVE ACCURACY OF MR-IMAGING RELATIVE TO MAMMOGRAPHY AND US FOR DEMONSTRATING EXTENT
    BOETES, C
    MUS, RDM
    HOLLAND, R
    BARENTSZ, JO
    STRIJK, SP
    WOBBES, T
    HENDRIKS, JHCL
    RUYS, SHJ
    RADIOLOGY, 1995, 197 (03) : 743 - 747
  • [43] PEYRONIE DISEASE - US FINDINGS AND COMPARISON WITH MR-IMAGING
    GALLEGOGALLEGO, MS
    LOPEZPINO, MA
    MARTINEZCHAMORRO, E
    CALEROGARCIA, R
    NUNEZALONSO, V
    LOZANOOJEDA, F
    RADIOLOGY, 1995, 197 : 499 - 499
  • [44] MR imaging versus PET/CT for evaluation of pancreatic lesions
    Beliao, Sara
    Ferreira, Alexandra
    Vierasu, Irina
    Blocklet, Didier
    Goldman, Serge
    Metens, Thierry
    Matos, Celso
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY, 2012, 81 (10) : 2527 - 2532
  • [45] PRIMARY TRACHEAL AND BRONCHIAL-STEM TUMORS - CT AND MR-IMAGING CHARACTERISTICS IN 22 CASES
    MURAYAMA, S
    MURAKAMI, J
    HASHIGUCHI, N
    SASAKI, T
    WATANABE, H
    MASUDA, K
    RADIOLOGY, 1995, 197 : 529 - 529
  • [46] MR PORTOGRAPHY - PRELIMINARY COMPARISON WITH CT PORTOGRAPHY AND CONVENTIONAL MR-IMAGING
    DRAVID, VS
    SHAPIRO, MJ
    MITCHELL, DG
    OUTWATER, EK
    PICCOLI, CW
    FELD, RI
    WECHSLER, RJ
    ROSATO, FE
    JMRI-JOURNAL OF MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING, 1994, 4 (06): : 767 - 771
  • [47] DOSE OF CONTRAST MATERIAL IN THE MR-IMAGING EVALUATION OF CENTRAL-NERVOUS-SYSTEM TUMORS
    YUH, WTC
    HALLORAN, JI
    MAYR, NA
    FISHER, DJ
    NGUYEN, HD
    SIMONSON, TM
    JMRI-JOURNAL OF MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING, 1994, 4 (03): : 243 - 249
  • [48] VASCULAR MASS LESIONS AND HYPERVASCULAR TUMORS IN THE HEAD AND NECK - CHARACTERISTICS AT CT, MR-IMAGING AND ANGIOGRAPHY
    ASPESTRAND, F
    KOLBENSTVEDT, A
    ACTA RADIOLOGICA, 1995, 36 (02) : 136 - 141
  • [49] THORACOLUMBAR BURST FRACTURES - EVALUATION WITH MR-IMAGING
    PETERSILGE, CA
    PATHRIA, MN
    EMERY, SE
    MASARYK, TJ
    RADIOLOGY, 1995, 194 (01) : 49 - 54
  • [50] TARSAL COALITION - DEPICTION AND CHARACTERIZATION WITH CT AND MR-IMAGING
    WECHSLER, RJ
    SCHWEITZER, ME
    DEELY, DM
    HORN, BD
    PIZZUTILLO, PD
    RADIOLOGY, 1994, 193 (02) : 447 - 452