11 19

Cited 0 times in

직장암의 자기공명영상 분석 : 복합코일 대 골반위상배열코일

Other Titles
 MR Evaluation of Rectal Carcinoma : Pelvic Phased-Array Coil Versus Endorectal-Pelvic Phased-Array Coil 
 정선양  ;  김명진  ;  정재준  ;  김남규  ;  박영년  ;  최필식  ;  이종태  ;  유형식  ;  민진식  ;  김동기 
 Journal of the Korean Radiologist Society (대한방사선의학회지), Vol.39(4) : 733-739, 1998 
Journal Title
 Journal of the Korean Radiologist Society (대한방사선의학회지) 
Issue Date
Magnetic resonance (MR), coil arrays ; Rectum, MR ; Rectum, neoplasms
PURPOSE: To compare the accuracy of MR imaging using an endorectal-pelvic and a pelvic phased-array coil forpreoperative local staging of rectal carcinoma. MATERIALS AND METHODS: To determine preoperative staging, 38patients with rectal carcinoma underwent MR imaging. All patients were examined with both an endorectal-pelvic anda pelvic phased-array coil. All underwent surgery and staging was pathologically confirmed. Two radiologistsblinded to pathologic stage analyzed perirectal invasion and perirectal node metastasis, and scored according to afour-point scale. Radiologic and pathologic findings were correlated. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC)analysis of Wilcoxon statistic (W values) was used to compare diagnostic accuracy between the two different MRmethods. Interobserver variation was measured using kappa statistics. RESULTS: For perirectal invasion, T1WIendorectal-pelvic phased-array coil images (reader 1: 0.854, reader 2: 0.818) showed higher W values than pelvicphased-array coil images (reader 1: 0.755, reader 2: 0.811). On T2WI, W values were higher according to pelvicphased-array coil images (reader 1: 0.828, reader 2: 0.861) than according to endorectal-pelvic phased-array coilimages (reader 1: 0.813, reader 2: 0.786). For perirectal node metastasis, pelvic phased-array coil images (reader1: 0.745, reader 2: 0.792) showed higher W values than endorectal-pelvic phased-array coil images (reader 1:0.722, reader 2: 0.775), according to both reader 1 and 2. The defference kappa values between the two readers wasless than 0.4 ; agreement between them was poor. CONCLUSION: The use of an endorectal-pelvic phased-array coildid not significantly improve the accuracy of assessment of perirectal invasion and perirectal node metastasis,and in MR imaging of rectal corcinoma, the routine use of an endorectal coil is not advocated.
Files in This Item:
T199802030.pdf Download
Appears in Collections:
1. College of Medicine (의과대학) > Dept. of Radiology (영상의학교실) > 1. Journal Papers
Yonsei Authors
Kim, Myeong Jin(김명진) ORCID logo https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7949-5402
Lee, Jong Tae(이종태)
Chung, Jae Joon(정재준) ORCID logo https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7447-1193
사서에게 알리기


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.