CT scan and magnetic resonance diffusion‑weighted imaging in the diagnosis and treatment of esophageal cancer

Guo,Lei; Zhang,Liulong; Zhao,Jianshe

doi:10.3892/ol.2018.9532

CT scan and magnetic resonance diffusion‑weighted imaging in the diagnosis and treatment of esophageal cancer

Authors:
- Lei Guo
- Liulong Zhang
- Jianshe Zhao
View Affiliations

Affiliations: Department of MRI, Jinan Central Hospital, Jinan, Shandong 250013, P.R. China, Department of Radiology, Dongying People's Hospital, Dongying, Shandong 257091, P.R. China, Department of Radiology, Jinan Children's Hospital, Jinan, Shandong 250022, P.R. China
Published online on: October 1, 2018 https://doi.org/10.3892/ol.2018.9532
Pages: 7117-7122

Metrics: Total Views: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Metrics: Total PDF Downloads: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Cited By (CrossRef): 0 citations Loading Articles...

Abstract

Value of computed tomography (CT) scan and diffusion‑weighted imaging (DWI) in the diagnosis and treatment of esophageal cancer was investigated. Seventy‑eight patients with esophageal cancer treated in Jinan Central Hospital (Jinan, China) from January 2013 to June 2014 were selected. All patients underwent CT scan and DWI examination, and their clinical history data were analyzed. DWI was conducted. The short‑term curative effect and the 3‑year survival rate of patients in the high apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) value group and the low ADC value group were compared; ADC values in the complete remission (CR) group and the partial remission (PR) group were compared. The difference in value between the length of esophageal lesions and the length of pathological specimens measured by CT scan was significantly different from that detected via DWI examination with b=600, 800 and 1,000 sec/mm2, respectively (P<0.05). The diagnostic rate of esophageal cancer via CT scan was significantly lower than that via DWI examination (P<0.05). After radiotherapy, the clinical control rate in the high ADC value group was significantly higher than that in the low ADC value group, and the 3‑year survival rate in the former was significantly higher than that in the latter (P<0.05). In the 2nd week during radiotherapy and at the end of radiotherapy, the ADC values in the CR group were significantly higher than those in the PR group (P<0.05). In the 2nd week during radiotherapy and at the end of radiotherapy, ADC values were used to predict the CR rate of radiotherapy for esophageal cancer, and the areas under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve were 0.776 and 0.935, respectively. Compared with CT scan, DWI has higher diagnostic rate and higher sensitivity. The length of esophageal tumor measured by DWI is close to that of pathological entity, which can guide the delineation of the target area of esophageal cancer.

View Figures

View References

1	Probst A, Aust D, Märkl B, Anthuber M and Messmann H: Early esophageal cancer in Europe: Endoscopic treatment by endoscopic submucosal dissection. Endoscopy. 47:113–121. 2015.PubMed/NCBI
2	Oyama T, Hotta K and Tomori A: Endoscopic submucosal dissection for superficial esophageal squamous cell carcinoma and adenocarcinoma. Gastrointest Endosc. 65:AB1102007. View Article : Google Scholar
3	van der Sluis PC, Ruurda JP, Verhage RJ, van der Horst S, Haverkamp L, Siersema PD, Rinkes Borel IH, Ten Kate FJ and van Hillegersberg R: Oncologic long-term results of robot-assisted minimally invasive thoraco-laparoscopic esophagectomy with two-field lymphadenectomy for esophageal cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 22 Suppl 3:S1350–S1356. 2015. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
4	Drummond MB, Lambert AA, Hussien AF, Lin CT, Merlo CA, Wise RA, Kirk GD and Brown RH: HIV infection is independently associated with increased CT scan lung density. Acad Radiol. 24:137–145. 2017. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
5	Boone D, Taylor SA and Halligan S: Diffusion weighted MRI: Overview and implications for rectal cancer management. Colorectal Dis. 15:655–661. 2013. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
6	Nozaki I, Hato S, Hori S, Nishide N and Kurita A: Incidence of food residue interfering with postoperative endoscopic examination for gastric pull-up after esophagectomy. Esophagus. 13:195–199. 2016. View Article : Google Scholar
7	Tachibana M, Kinugasa S, Hirahara N and Yoshimura H: Lymph node classification of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma and adenocarcinoma. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 34:427–431. 2008. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
8	Arnal Domper MJ, Ferrández Arenas Á and Lanas Arbeloa Á: Esophageal cancer: Risk factors, screening and endoscopic treatment in Western and Eastern countries. World J Gastroenterol. 21:7933–7943. 2015. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
9	Xu W, Liu Z, Bao Q and Qian Z: Viruses, other pathogenic microorganisms and esophageal cancer. Gastrointest Tumors. 2:2–13. 2015. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
10	Lin G, Han SY, Xu YP and Mao WM: Increasing the interval between neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and surgery in esophageal cancer: A meta-analysis of published studies. Dis Esophagus. 29:1107–1114. 2016. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
11	Chou CT, Chen RC, Lin WC, Ko CJ, Chen CB and Chen YL: Prediction of microvascular invasion of hepatocellular carcinoma: Preoperative CT and histopathologic correlation. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 203:W253–9. 2014. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
12	Ganten MK, Schuessler M, Bäuerle T, Muenter M, Schlemmer HP, Jensen A, Brand K, Dueck M, Dinkel J, Kopp-Schneider A, et al: The role of perfusion effects in monitoring of chemoradiotherapy of rectal carcinoma using diffusion-weighted imaging. Cancer Imaging. 13:548–556. 2013. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
13	Tchelebi L and Ashamalla H: Overcoming the hurdles of using PET/CT for target volume delineation in curative intent radiotherapy of non-small cell lung cancer. Ann Transl Med. 3:1912015.PubMed/NCBI
14	Anderson SW, Barry B, Soto JA, Ozonoff A, O'Brien M and Jara H: Quantifying hepatic fibrosis using a biexponential model of diffusion weighted imaging in ex vivo liver specimens. Magn Reson Imaging. 30:1475–1482. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
15	Giganti F, Salerno A, Ambrosi A, Chiari D, Orsenigo E, Esposito A, Albarello L, Mazza E, Staudacher C, Del Maschio A, et al: Prognostic utility of diffusion-weighted MRI in oesophageal cancer: Is apparent diffusion coefficient a potential marker of tumour aggressiveness? Radiol Med (Torino). 121:173–180. 2016. View Article : Google Scholar
16	Purushotham A, Campbell BC, Straka M, Mlynash M, Olivot JM, Bammer R, Kemp SM, Albers GW and Lansberg MG: Apparent diffusion coefficient threshold for delineation of ischemic core. Int J Stroke. 10:348–353. 2015. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
17	Mori N, Ota H, Mugikura S, Takasawa C, Ishida T, Watanabe G, Tada H, Watanabe M, Takase K and Takahashi S: Luminal-type breast cancer: Correlation of apparent diffusion coefficients with the Ki-67 labeling index. Radiology. 274:66–73. 2015. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
18	PLOS ONE Staff: Correction: Correlation of the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) with the standardized uptake value (SUV) in lymph node metastases of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients using hybrid 18F-FDG PET/MRI. PLoS One. 10:e01206062015. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
19	Boesen L, Chabanova E, Løgager V, Balslev I and Thomsen HS: Apparent diffusion coefficient ratio correlates significantly with prostate cancer gleason score at final pathology. J Magn Reson Imaging. 42:446–453. 2015. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI