Skip to main content
OUP
Short communication

Techniques and trouble-shooting in high spatial resolution thin slice MRI for rectal cancer

Published Online:https://doi.org/10.1259/bjr/33540239

Abstract

MRI is increasingly advocated as an optimal method of staging rectal cancer. The technique enables depiction of the relationship of tumour to the mesorectal fascia and may thus identify tumours at risk of positive circumferential margin involvement at surgery. Depth of extramural spread may also be accurately measured and tumour deposits within the mesorectum are shown. It is important that a high spatial resolution technique is used in order to accurately depict these features and care should be taken in ensuring that images acquired cover the entire rectal tumour and mesorectum. This paper describes the technique of high spatial resolution rectal cancer imaging and the potential technical pitfalls in acquiring good quality images. Important factors to consider include: adequate scan duration to achieve high spatial resolution images with sufficient signal to noise ratio, careful positioning of the pelvic phased array coil, use of T2 weighted turbo spin-echo rather than T1 weighted imaging and careful planning of scans to ensure that images are obtained perpendicular to the rectal wall.

References

  • 1 Sobin L, Wittekind C, editors. TNM classification of malignant tumours (5th edn). New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1997. Google Scholar

  • 2 Adam IJ, Mohamdee MO, Martin IG, Scott N, Finan PJ, Johnston D, et al. Role of circumferential margin involvement in the local recurrence of rectal cancer. Lancet 1994;344:707–11. Crossref Medline ISIGoogle Scholar

  • 3 Hall NR, Finan PJ, al-Jaberi T, Tsang CS, Brown SR, Dixon MF, et al. Circumferential margin involvement after mesorectal excision of rectal cancer with curative intent. Predictor of survival but not local recurrence? Dis Colon Rectum 1998;41:979–83. Crossref Medline ISIGoogle Scholar

  • 4 Brown G, Richards CJ, Newcombe RG, Dallimore NS, Radcliffe AG, Carey DP, et al. Rectal carcinoma: thin-section MR imaging for staging in 28 patients. Radiology 1999;211:215–22. Crossref Medline ISIGoogle Scholar

  • 5 Brown G, Kirkham A, Williams GT, Bourne M, Radcliffe AG, Sayman J, et al. High-resolution MRI of the anatomy important in total mesorectal excision of the rectum. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2004;182:431–9. Crossref Medline ISIGoogle Scholar

  • 6 Bartram CI, Brown G. Endorectal ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging in rectal cancer staging. Gastroenterol Clin North Am 2002;31:827–39. Crossref Medline ISIGoogle Scholar

  • 7 Brown G, Radcliffe AG, Newcombe RG, Dallimore NS, Bourne MW, Williams GT. Preoperative assessment of prognostic factors in rectal cancer using high-resolution magnetic resonance imaging. Br J Surg 2003;90:355–64. Crossref Medline ISIGoogle Scholar

  • 8 Schnall MD, Furth EE, Rosato EF, Kressel HY. Rectal tumor stage: correlation of endorectal MR imaging and pathologic findings [see comments]. Radiology 1994;190:709–14. Crossref Medline ISIGoogle Scholar

  • 9 Indinnimeo M, Grasso RF, Cicchini C, Pavone P, Stazi A, Catalano C, et al. Endorectal magnetic resonance imaging in the preoperative staging of rectal tumors. Int Surg 1996;81:419–22. Medline ISIGoogle Scholar

  • 10 Blomqvist L, Machado M, Rubio C, Gabrielsson N, Granqvist S, Goldman S, et al. Rectal tumour staging: MR imaging using pelvic phased-array and endorectal coils vs endoscopic ultrasonography. Eur Radiol 2000;10:653–60. Crossref Medline ISIGoogle Scholar

  • 11 Drew PJ, Farouk R, Turnbull LW, Ward SC, Hartley JE, Monson JR. Preoperative magnetic resonance staging of rectal cancer with an endorectal coil and dynamic gadolinium enhancement. Br J Surg 1999;86:250–4. Crossref Medline ISIGoogle Scholar

  • 12 Joosten FB, Jansen JB, Joosten HJ, Rosenbusch G. Staging of rectal carcinoma using MR double surface coil, MR endorectal coil, and intrarectal ultrasound: correlation with histopathologic findings. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1995;19:752–8. Crossref Medline ISIGoogle Scholar

  • 13 Okizuka H, Sugimura K, Yoshizako T, Kaji Y, Wada A. Rectal carcinoma: prospective comparison of conventional and gadopentetate dimeglumine enhanced fat-suppressed MR imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging 1996;6:465–71. Crossref Medline ISIGoogle Scholar

  • 14 Beets-Tan RG, Beets GL, Vliegen RF, Kessels AG, Van Boven H, De Bruine A, et al. Accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging in prediction of tumour-free resection margin in rectal cancer surgery. Lancet 2001;357:497–504. Crossref Medline ISIGoogle Scholar

  • 15 Radcliffe A, Brown G. Will MRI provide maps of lines of excision for rectal cancer? Lancet 2001;357:495–6. Crossref Medline ISIGoogle Scholar

  • 16 Brown G, Davies S, Williams GT, Bourne MW, Newcombe RG, Radcliffe AG, et al. Effectiveness of preoperative staging in rectal cancer: digital rectal examination, endoluminal ultrasound or magnetic resonance imaging? Br J Cancer 2004;91:23–9. Crossref Medline ISIGoogle Scholar

  • 17 Brown G, Richards CJ, Bourne MW, Newcombe RG, Radcliffe AG, Dallimore NS, et al. Morphologic predictors of lymph node status in rectal cancer with use of high-spatial-resolution MR imaging with histopathologic comparison. Radiology 2003;227:371–7. Crossref Medline ISIGoogle Scholar

Volume 78, Issue 927March 2005
Pages: 181-286

© The British Institute of Radiology


History

  • ReceivedMarch 29,2004
  • RevisedOctober 06,2004
  • AcceptedNovember 25,2004
  • Published onlineFebruary 13,2014

Metrics