nach oben

Abdominal Radiology

Erschienen in:

23.07.2021 | Special Section: Quantitative Imaging

Quantitative imaging of uterine cancers with diffusion-weighted MRI and 18-fluorodeoxyglucose PET/CT

verfasst von: Madeleine Sertic, Aoife Kilcoyne, Onofrio Antonio Catalano, Susanna I. Lee

Erschienen in: Abdominal Radiology | Ausgabe 9/2022

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Imaging plays an important role in the diagnosis and treatment of women with uterine cervical and endometrial cancers. Quantitative imaging, through MRI, PET/CT, and hybrid PET/MRI, allows for characterization of primary tumors beyond anatomic and qualitative descriptors. MRI diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) yields an apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC), which can be applied in both the pre-and post-treatment assessment of uterine tumors. PET/CT assesses metabolic activity, and measurement of tumor standardized uptake value (SUV) is a useful metric in the staging of uterine malignancies. Hybrid PET/MRI is an emerging modality that combines the soft tissue contrast of MRI with the molecular imaging capability of PET. This review provides an overview of these quantitative imaging modalities, and their current and potential roles in the assessment of uterine cervical and cancer.

Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, Laversanne M, Soerjomataram I, Jemal A, et al. Global cancer statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2021. https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21660.CrossRefPubMed

Amant F, Mirza MR, Koskas M, Creutzberg CL. Cancer of the corpus uteri. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2018;143 Suppl 2:37-50. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijgo.12612.CrossRefPubMed

Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Siegel RL, Torre LA, Jemal A. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2018;68(6):394-424. https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21492.CrossRefPubMed

Prabhakar HB, Kraeft JJ, Schorge JO, Scott JA, Lee SI. FDG PET-CT of gynecologic cancers: pearls and pitfalls. Abdom Imaging. 2015;40(7):2472-85. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-015-0362-7.CrossRefPubMed

Lee SI, Atri M. 2018 FIGO Staging System for Uterine Cervical Cancer: Enter Cross-sectional Imaging. Radiology. 2019;292(1):15-24. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2019190088.CrossRefPubMed

Masch WR, Daye D, Lee SI. MR Imaging for Incidental Adnexal Mass Characterization. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am. 2017;25(3):521-43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mric.2017.03.001.CrossRefPubMed

deSouza NM, Winfield JM, Waterton JC, Weller A, Papoutsaki MV, Doran SJ, et al. Implementing diffusion-weighted MRI for body imaging in prospective multicentre trials: current considerations and future perspectives. Eur Radiol. 2018;28(3):1118-31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-017-4972-z.CrossRefPubMed

Partridge SC, McDonald ES. Diffusion weighted magnetic resonance imaging of the breast: protocol optimization, interpretation, and clinical applications. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am. 2013;21(3):601-24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mric.2013.04.007.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Qayyum A. Diffusion-weighted imaging in the abdomen and pelvis: concepts and applications. Radiographics. 2009;29(6):1797-810. https://doi.org/10.1148/rg.296095521.CrossRefPubMed

10.

Moore WA, Khatri G, Madhuranthakam AJ, Sims RD, Pedrosa I. Added value of diffusion-weighted acquisitions in MRI of the abdomen and pelvis. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2014;202(5):995-1006. https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.12.9563.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

11.

Davarpanah AH, Kambadakone A, Holalkere NS, Guimaraes AR, Hahn PF, Lee SI. Diffusion MRI of uterine and ovarian masses: identifying the benign lesions. Abdom Radiol (NY). 2016;41(12):2466-75. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-016-0909-2.CrossRefPubMed

12.

Ghosh A, Singh T, Singla V, Bagga R, Khandelwal N. Comparison of Absolute Apparent Diffusion Coefficient (ADC) Values in ADC Maps Generated Across Different Postprocessing Software: Reproducibility in Endometrial Carcinoma. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2017;209(6):1312-20. https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.17.18002.CrossRefPubMed

13.

Pathak R, Ragheb H, Thacker NA, Morris DM, Amiri H, Kuijer J, et al. A data-driven statistical model that estimates measurement uncertainty improves interpretation of ADC reproducibility: a multi-site study of liver metastases. Sci Rep. 2017;7(1):14084. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-14625-0.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

14.

Jafar MM, Parsai A, Miquel ME. Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging in cancer: Reported apparent diffusion coefficients, in-vitro and in-vivo reproducibility. World J Radiol. 2016;8(1):21-49. https://doi.org/10.4329/wjr.v8.i1.21.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

15.

Mitchell DG, Snyder B, Coakley F, Reinhold C, Thomas G, Amendola M, et al. Early invasive cervical cancer: tumor delineation by magnetic resonance imaging, computed tomography, and clinical examination, verified by pathologic results, in the ACRIN 6651/GOG 183 Intergroup Study. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24(36):5687-94. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2006.07.4799.CrossRefPubMed

16.

Dappa E, Elger T, Hasenburg A, Düber C, Battista MJ, Hötker AM. The value of advanced MRI techniques in the assessment of cervical cancer: a review. Insights Imaging. 2017;8(5):471-81. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13244-017-0567-0.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

17.

Pandharipande PV, Choy G, del Carmen MG, Gazelle GS, Russell AH, Lee SI. MRI and PET/CT for triaging stage IB clinically operable cervical cancer to appropriate therapy: decision analysis to assess patient outcomes. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2009;192(3):802-14. https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.08.1224.CrossRefPubMed

18.

Lee SI, Catalano OA, Dehdashti F. Evaluation of gynecologic cancer with MR imaging, 18F-FDG PET/CT, and PET/MR imaging. J Nucl Med. 2015;56(3):436-43. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.114.145011.CrossRefPubMed

19.

Qu JR, Qin L, Li X, Luo JP, Li J, Zhang HK, et al. Predicting Parametrial Invasion in Cervical Carcinoma (Stages IB1, IB2, and IIA): Diagnostic Accuracy of T2-Weighted Imaging Combined With DWI at 3 T. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2018;210(3):677-84. https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.17.18104.CrossRefPubMed

20.

Park JJ, Kim CK, Park SY, Park BK. Parametrial invasion in cervical cancer: fused T2-weighted imaging and high-b-value diffusion-weighted imaging with background body signal suppression at 3 T. Radiology. 2015;274(3):734-41. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.14140920.CrossRefPubMed

21.

Nguyen NC, Beriwal S, Moon CH, D'Ardenne N, Mountz JM, Furlan A, et al. Diagnostic Value of FDG PET/MRI in Females With Pelvic Malignancy-A Systematic Review of the Literature. Front Oncol. 2020;10:519440. https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2020.519440.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

22.

Nakamura K, Joja I, Nagasaka T, Fukushima C, Kusumoto T, Seki N, et al. The mean apparent diffusion coefficient value (ADCmean) on primary cervical cancer is a predictive marker for disease recurrence. Gynecol Oncol. 2012;127(3):478-83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2012.07.123.CrossRefPubMed

23.

Shih IL, Yen RF, Chen CA, Cheng WF, Chen BB, Chang YH, et al. PET/MRI in Cervical Cancer: Associations Between Imaging Biomarkers and Tumor Stage, Disease Progression, and Overall Survival. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2021;53(1):305-18. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.27311.CrossRefPubMed

24.

Thomeer MG, Vandecaveye V, Braun L, Mayer F, Franckena-Schouten M, de Boer P, et al. Evaluation of T2-W MR imaging and diffusion-weighted imaging for the early post-treatment local response assessment of patients treated conservatively for cervical cancer: a multicentre study. European radiology. 2019;29(1):309-18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-018-5510-3.CrossRefPubMed

25.

Kilcoyne A, Chow DZ, Lee SI. FDG-PET for Assessment of Endometrial and Vulvar Cancer. Semin Nucl Med. 2019;49(6):471-83. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.semnuclmed.2019.06.011.CrossRefPubMed

26.

Moharamzad Y, Davarpanah AH, Yaghobi Joybari A, Shahbazi F, Esmaeilian Toosi L, Kooshkiforooshani M, et al. Diagnostic performance of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) for differentiating endometrial carcinoma from benign lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Abdom Radiol (NY). 2021;46(3):1115-28. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-020-02734-w.CrossRefPubMed

27.

Shih IL, Yen RF, Chen CA, Chen BB, Wei SY, Chang WC, et al. Standardized uptake value and apparent diffusion coefficient of endometrial cancer evaluated with integrated whole-body PET/MR: Correlation with pathological prognostic factors. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2015;42(6):1723-32. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.24932.CrossRefPubMed

28.

Nougaret S, Reinhold C, Alsharif SS, Addley H, Arceneau J, Molinari N, et al. Endometrial Cancer: Combined MR Volumetry and Diffusion-weighted Imaging for Assessment of Myometrial and Lymphovascular Invasion and Tumor Grade. Radiology. 2015;276(3):797-808. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.15141212.CrossRefPubMed

29.

Reyes-Pérez JA, Villaseñor-Navarro Y, Jiménez de Los Santos ME, Pacheco-Bravo I, Calle-Loja M, Sollozo-Dupont I. The apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) on 3-T MRI differentiates myometrial invasion depth and histological grade in patients with endometrial cancer. Acta Radiol. 2020;61(9):1277-86. https://doi.org/10.1177/0284185119898658.CrossRefPubMed

30.

Rechichi G, Galimberti S, Signorelli M, Franzesi CT, Perego P, Valsecchi MG, et al. Endometrial cancer: correlation of apparent diffusion coefficient with tumor grade, depth of myometrial invasion, and presence of lymph node metastases. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2011;197(1):256-62. https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.10.5584.CrossRefPubMed

31.

Atri M, Zhang Z, Dehdashti F, Lee SI, Ali S, Marques H, et al. Utility of PET-CT to evaluate retroperitoneal lymph node metastasis in advanced cervical cancer: Results of ACRIN6671/GOG0233 trial. Gynecol Oncol. 2016;142(3):413-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2016.05.002.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

32.

Atri M, Zhang Z, Dehdashti F, Lee SI, Marques H, Ali S, et al. Utility of PET/CT to Evaluate Retroperitoneal Lymph Node Metastasis in High-Risk Endometrial Cancer: Results of ACRIN 6671/GOG 0233 Trial. Radiology. 2017;283(2):450-9. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2016160200.CrossRefPubMed

33.

Gee MS, Atri M, Bandos AI, Mannel RS, Gold MA, Lee SI. Identification of Distant Metastatic Disease in Uterine Cervical and Endometrial Cancers with FDG PET/CT: Analysis from the ACRIN 6671/GOG 0233 Multicenter Trial. Radiology. 2018;287(1):176-84. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2017170963.CrossRefPubMed

34.

Nogami Y, Iida M, Banno K, Kisu I, Adachi M, Nakamura K, et al. Application of FDG-PET in cervical cancer and endometrial cancer: utility and future prospects. Anticancer Res. 2014;34(2):585-92.PubMed

35.

Lee LK, Kilcoyne A, Goldberg-Stein S, Chow DZ, Lee SI. FDG PET-CT of Genitourinary and Gynecologic Tumors: Overcoming the Challenges of Evaluating the Abdomen and Pelvis. Semin Roentgenol. 2016;51(1):2-11. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.ro.2015.12.007.CrossRefPubMed

36.

Fahey FH, Kinahan PE, Doot RK, Kocak M, Thurston H, Poussaint TY. Variability in PET quantitation within a multicenter consortium. Med Phys. 2010;37(7):3660-6. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.3455705.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

37.

Jacene HA, Leboulleux S, Baba S, Chatzifotiadis D, Goudarzi B, Teytelbaum O, et al. Assessment of interobserver reproducibility in quantitative 18F-FDG PET and CT measurements of tumor response to therapy. J Nucl Med. 2009;50(11):1760-9. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.109.063321.CrossRefPubMed

38.

Huang YE, Chen CF, Huang YJ, Konda SD, Appelbaum DE, Pu Y. Interobserver variability among measurements of the maximum and mean standardized uptake values on (18)F-FDG PET/CT and measurements of tumor size on diagnostic CT in patients with pulmonary tumors. Acta Radiol. 2010;51(7):782-8. https://doi.org/10.3109/02841851.2010.497772.CrossRefPubMed

39.

Benz MR, Evilevitch V, Allen-Auerbach MS, Eilber FC, Phelps ME, Czernin J, et al. Treatment monitoring by 18F-FDG PET/CT in patients with sarcomas: interobserver variability of quantitative parameters in treatment-induced changes in histopathologically responding and nonresponding tumors. J Nucl Med. 2008;49(7):1038-46. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.107.050187.CrossRefPubMed

40.

Shankar LK, Hoffman JM, Bacharach S, Graham MM, Karp J, Lammertsma AA, et al. Consensus recommendations for the use of 18F-FDG PET as an indicator of therapeutic response in patients in National Cancer Institute Trials. J Nucl Med. 2006;47(6):1059-66.PubMed

41.

Gandy N, Arshad MA, Park WE, Rockall AG, Barwick TD. FDG-PET Imaging in Cervical Cancer. Semin Nucl Med. 2019;49(6):461-70. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.semnuclmed.2019.06.007.CrossRefPubMed

42.

Choi HJ, Ju W, Myung SK, Kim Y. Diagnostic performance of computer tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and positron emission tomography or positron emission tomography/computer tomography for detection of metastatic lymph nodes in patients with cervical cancer: meta-analysis. Cancer Sci. 2010;101(6):1471-9. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1349-7006.2010.01532.x.CrossRefPubMed

43.

Signorelli M, Guerra L, Montanelli L, Crivellaro C, Buda A, Dell'Anna T, et al. Preoperative staging of cervical cancer: is 18-FDG-PET/CT really effective in patients with early stage disease? Gynecol Oncol. 2011;123(2):236-40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2011.07.096.CrossRefPubMed

44.

Kidd EA, Siegel BA, Dehdashti F, Rader JS, Mutch DG, Powell MA, et al. Lymph node staging by positron emission tomography in cervical cancer: relationship to prognosis. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28(12):2108-13. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2009.25.4151.CrossRefPubMed

45.

Sun Y, Lu P, Yu L. The Volume-metabolic Combined Parameters from (18)F-FDG PET/CT May Help Predict the Outcomes of Cervical Carcinoma. Acad Radiol. 2016;23(5):605-10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acra.2016.01.001.CrossRefPubMed

46.

Kidd EA, El Naqa I, Siegel BA, Dehdashti F, Grigsby PW. FDG-PET-based prognostic nomograms for locally advanced cervical cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2012;127(1):136-40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2012.06.027.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

47.

Bollineni VR, Ytre-Hauge S, Gulati A, Halle MK, Woie K, Salvesen Ø, et al. The prognostic value of preoperative FDG-PET/CT metabolic parameters in cervical cancer patients. European Journal of Hybrid Imaging. 2018;2(1):24. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41824-018-0042-2.CrossRef

48.

Grigsby PW, Siegel BA, Dehdashti F, Rader J, Zoberi I. Posttherapy [18F] fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in carcinoma of the cervix: response and outcome. J Clin Oncol. 2004;22(11):2167-71. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2004.09.035.CrossRefPubMed

49.

Kidd EA, Siegel BA, Dehdashti F, Grigsby PW. The standardized uptake value for F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose is a sensitive predictive biomarker for cervical cancer treatment response and survival. Cancer. 2007;110(8):1738-44. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.22974.CrossRefPubMed

50.

Xue F, Lin LL, Dehdashti F, Miller TR, Siegel BA, Grigsby PW. F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose uptake in primary cervical cancer as an indicator of prognosis after radiation therapy. Gynecol Oncol. 2006;101(1):147-51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2005.10.005.CrossRefPubMed

51.

St Laurent JD, Davis MR, Feltmate CM, Goodman A, Del Carmen MG, Horowitz NE, et al. Prognostic Value of Preoperative Imaging: Comparing 18F-Fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography-Computed Tomography to Computed Tomography Alone for Preoperative Planning in High-risk Histology Endometrial Carcinoma. Am J Clin Oncol. 2020;43(10):714-9. https://doi.org/10.1097/coc.0000000000000735.CrossRefPubMed

52.

Kitajima K, Murakami K, Yamasaki E, Fukasawa I, Inaba N, Kaji Y, et al. Accuracy of 18F-FDG PET/CT in detecting pelvic and paraaortic lymph node metastasis in patients with endometrial cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2008;190(6):1652-8. https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.07.3372.CrossRefPubMed

53.

Nakamura K, Kodama J, Okumura Y, Hongo A, Kanazawa S, Hiramatsu Y. The SUVmax of 18F-FDG PET correlates with histological grade in endometrial cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2010;20(1):110-5. https://doi.org/10.1111/IGC.0b013e3181c3a288.CrossRefPubMed

54.

Chung HH, Kim JW, Kang KW, Park NH, Song YS, Chung JK, et al. Post-treatment [¹⁸F]FDG maximum standardized uptake value as a prognostic marker of recurrence in endometrial carcinoma. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2011;38(1):74-80. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-010-1614-y.CrossRefPubMed

55.

Catalano OA, Daye D, Signore A, Iannace C, Vangel M, Luongo A, et al. Staging performance of whole-body DWI, PET/CT and PET/MRI in invasive ductal carcinoma of the breast. Int J Oncol. 2017;51(1):281-8. https://doi.org/10.3892/ijo.2017.4012.CrossRefPubMed

56.

Catalano OA, Nicolai E, Rosen BR, Luongo A, Catalano M, Iannace C, et al. Comparison of CE-FDG-PET/CT with CE-FDG-PET/MR in the evaluation of osseous metastases in breast cancer patients. Br J Cancer. 2015;112(9):1452-60. https://doi.org/10.1038/bjc.2015.112.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

57.

Catalano OA, Lee SI, Parente C, Cauley C, Furtado FS, Striar R, et al. Improving staging of rectal cancer in the pelvis: the role of PET/MRI. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2021;48(4):1235-45. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-020-05036-x.CrossRefPubMed

58.

Grueneisen J, Beiderwellen K, Heusch P, Gratz M, Schulze-Hagen A, Heubner M, et al. Simultaneous positron emission tomography/magnetic resonance imaging for whole-body staging in patients with recurrent gynecological malignancies of the pelvis: a comparison to whole-body magnetic resonance imaging alone. Invest Radiol. 2014;49(12):808-15. https://doi.org/10.1097/rli.0000000000000086.CrossRefPubMed

59.

Ward RD, Amorim B, Li W, King J, Umutlu L, Groshar D, et al. Abdominal and pelvic (18)F-FDG PET/MR: a review of current and emerging oncologic applications. Abdom Radiol (NY). 2021;46(3):1236-48. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-020-02766-2.CrossRefPubMed

60.

Choi BB, Kim SH, Kang BJ, Lee JH, Song BJ, Jeong SH, et al. Diffusion-weighted imaging and FDG PET/CT: predicting the prognoses with apparent diffusion coefficient values and maximum standardized uptake values in patients with invasive ductal carcinoma. World J Surg Oncol. 2012;10:126. https://doi.org/10.1186/1477-7819-10-126.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

61.

Brandmaier P, Purz S, Bremicker K, Höckel M, Barthel H, Kluge R, et al. Simultaneous [18F]FDG-PET/MRI: Correlation of Apparent Diffusion Coefficient (ADC) and Standardized Uptake Value (SUV) in Primary and Recurrent Cervical Cancer. PLoS One. 2015;10(11):e0141684. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0141684.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

62.

Floberg JM, Fowler KJ, Fuser D, DeWees TA, Dehdashti F, Siegel BA, et al. Spatial relationship of 2-deoxy-2-[(18)F]-fluoro-D-glucose positron emission tomography and magnetic resonance diffusion imaging metrics in cervical cancer. EJNMMI Res. 2018;8(1):52. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13550-018-0403-7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

63.

Surov A, Meyer HJ, Schob S, Höhn AK, Bremicker K, Exner M, et al. Parameters of simultaneous 18F-FDG-PET/MRI predict tumor stage and several histopathological features in uterine cervical cancer. Oncotarget. 2017;8(17):28285-96. https://doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.16043.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

64.

Rakheja R, Chandarana H, DeMello L, Jackson K, Geppert C, Faul D, et al. Correlation between standardized uptake value and apparent diffusion coefficient of neoplastic lesions evaluated with whole-body simultaneous hybrid PET/MRI. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2013;201(5):1115-9. https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.13.11304.CrossRefPubMed

65.

Fraum TJ, Fowler KJ, Crandall JP, Laforest RA, Salter A, An H, et al. Measurement Repeatability of (18)F-FDG PET/CT Versus (18)F-FDG PET/MRI in Solid Tumors of the Pelvis. J Nucl Med. 2019;60(8):1080-6. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.118.218735.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

66.

Catana C. Attenuation correction for human PET/MRI studies. Phys Med Biol. 2020;65(23):23tr02. https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6560/abb0f8.CrossRef

67.

Bezrukov I, Schmidt H, Mantlik F, Schwenzer N, Brendle C, Schölkopf B, et al. MR-based attenuation correction methods for improved PET quantification in lesions within bone and susceptibility artifact regions. J Nucl Med. 2013;54(10):1768-74. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.112.113209.CrossRefPubMed

68.

Fuin N, Catalano OA, Scipioni M, Canjels LPW, Izquierdo-Garcia D, Pedemonte S, et al. Concurrent Respiratory Motion Correction of Abdominal PET and Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced-MRI Using a Compressed Sensing Approach. J Nucl Med. 2018;59(9):1474-9. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.117.203943.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Titel: Quantitative imaging of uterine cancers with diffusion-weighted MRI and 18-fluorodeoxyglucose PET/CT
verfasst von: Madeleine Sertic
Aoife Kilcoyne
Onofrio Antonio Catalano
Susanna I. Lee
Publikationsdatum: 23.07.2021
Verlag: Springer US
Erschienen in: Abdominal Radiology / Ausgabe 9/2022
Print ISSN: 2366-004X
Elektronische ISSN: 2366-0058
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-021-03218-1

Update Radiologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

Newsletter bestellen

Springer Medizin

Quantitative imaging of uterine cancers with diffusion-weighted MRI and 18-fluorodeoxyglucose PET/CT

Abstract

Neu im Fachgebiet Radiologie

Darf man die Behandlung eines Neonazis ablehnen?

Ein Drittel der jungen Ärztinnen und Ärzte erwägt abzuwandern

Endlich: Zi zeigt, mit welchen PVS Praxen zufrieden sind

Akuter Schwindel: Wann lohnt sich eine MRT?

Update Radiologie

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 9/2022

Percutaneous cryoablation: a novel treatment option in non-visceral metastases of the abdominal cavity after prior surgery

Complications of percutaneous transhepatic cholangiography and biliary drainage, a multicenter observational study

Contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging perfusion can predict microvascular invasion in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (between 1 and 5 cm)

Immunotherapy-related renal toxicity causes reversible renal enlargement

Computed diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging with high b-values in the diagnosis of gallbladder lesions

Diagnostic value of the relative enhancement ratio of the portal venous phase to unenhanced CT in the identification of lipid-poor adrenal tumors

Neu im Fachgebiet Radiologie

Darf man die Behandlung eines Neonazis ablehnen?

Ein Drittel der jungen Ärztinnen und Ärzte erwägt abzuwandern

Endlich: Zi zeigt, mit welchen PVS Praxen zufrieden sind

Akuter Schwindel: Wann lohnt sich eine MRT?

Update Radiologie