No abstract

No abstract

PurposeTo construct an inductively‐coupled receiver coil system for use with a magnetic resonance (MR) compatible endoscope, and to evaluate its use in a pilot group of patients with esophageal cancer.Materials and MethodsAn inductively‐coupled coil system, comprising a saddle geometry cylindrical receiver coil fitted as a sleeve around the endoscope tip and a pick‐up coil housed within a channel of an MR‐compatible endoscope, was designed and developed for use at 0.5 T. Twenty‐three patients with esophageal cancer were recruited for MR endoscopy. In 17 cases, the endoscopic coil system was used in conjunction with an external surface coil in order to obtain information from the surrounding mediastinum. The examination took 40–50 minutes.ResultsMR imaging using the inductively‐coupled endoscopic coil was successful in 21 cases (one failed intubation and one artifact from unrelated external source). Image artifact was largely due to respiration and global patient motion in sedated individuals undergoing endoscopy.ConclusionInductively‐coupled coil systems may be used with endoscopes to allow improved safety through increased patient‐system isolation and detachability of coils and electronics for repair or replacement with coils tuned for different frequencies. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2003;18:131–135. © 2003 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.

The authors defined esophageal anatomy and evaluated esophageal cancer staging in a pilot group by comparing endoscopic magnetic resonance (MR) imaging results with pathologic and endoscopic ultrasonographic (US) results when available. A porcine esophagus, one volunteer, and 23 patients suspected of having esophageal cancer were imaged at 0.5 T. MR imaging was successful in 21 patients. Eight of these patients underwent esophagectomy (one after chemotherapy, which invalidated comparison with MR imaging; another did not undergo lymphadenectomy) and one underwent laparoscopy and nodal staging only; eight underwent US. When verified with pathologic staging, endoscopic MR imaging was accurate in six of seven patients (T stage) and five of six patients (N stage; nodal areas too obscured by artifact for comparison in one case). MR imaging and US results concurred in seven of eight (T stage) and five of eight (N stage) patients. No complications were observed. Endoscopic MR imaging is safe and probably comparable to endoscopic US, but with a tendency to overstage the disease.

No abstract