Value of Non‐Contrast‐Enhanced Vessel Wall MR Imaging in Assessing Vascular Invasion of Retroperitoneal Tumors

Abstract

BackgroundDue to their location and growth patterns, retroperitoneal tumors often involve the surrounding blood vessels. Clinical decisions on a proper treatment depend on the information on this condition. Evaluation of blood vessels using non‐contrast‐enhanced vessel wall MRI may provide noninvasive assessment of the extent of tumor invasion to assist clinical decision‐making.PurposeTo investigate the performance and potential of non‐contrast‐enhanced vessel wall MRI in evaluating the degree of vessel wall invasion of retroperitoneal tumors.Study TypeProspective.PopulationThirty‐seven participants (mean age: 60.59 ± 11.77 years, 59% male) with retroperitoneal tumors close to vessels based on their diagnostic computer tomography.Field Strength/Sequences3 T; vessel wall MRI sequences: two‐dimensional T2‐weighted MultiVane XD turbo spin‐echo (2D‐T2‐MVXD‐TSE) and three‐dimensional T1‐weighted motion sensitized driven equilibrium fat suppression turbo spin‐echo (3D‐T1‐MSDE‐TSE) sequences; conventional MRI sequences: T2‐weighted fat suppression turbo spin‐echo (T2‐FS‐TSE), T2‐weighted turbo spin‐echo (T2‐TSE), modified Dixon T1‐weighted fast field echo (T1‐mDixon‐FFE), and diffusion‐weighted echo planar imaging (DWI‐EPI) sequences.AssessmentAll patients underwent preoperative imaging using both non‐contrast conventional and vessel wall MRI sequences. Images obtained from conventional and vessel wall MRI sequences were evaluated independently by three junior radiologists (3 and 2 years of experience in reading MRI) and reviewed by one senior radiologist (25 years of experience in reading MRI) to assess the degree of vessel wall invasion. MRI were validated results from the clinical standard diagnosis based on surgical confirmation or histopathological reports. Interobserver agreement was determined based on the reports from three readers with similar years of experiences. Intraobserver variability was assessed based on categorizing and recategorizing the vessels of 37 patients 1 month apart.Statistical TestsIntra‐class correlation efficient (ICC), Chi‐square test, McNemar test, area under the receiver‐operating characteristic curve (AUC), Delong test, P < 0.05 was considered significant.ResultsThe accuracy of vessel wall MRI (91.96%, 95% CI: 85.43–95.71; 103 of 112) in detecting the degree of vessel wall invasion was significantly higher than that of conventional MRI (75%, 95% CI: 66.24–82.10; 84 of 112). The interobserver variability or reproducibility in categorization of the degree of vascular wall invasion was good in evaluating images from conventional and vessel wall MRI sequences (ICC = 0.821, 95% CI: 0.765–0.867 and ICC = 0.881, 95% CI: 0.842–0.913, respectively).Data ConclusionDiagnosis of vessel wall invasion of retroperitoneal tumors and assessment of its severity can be improved by using non‐contrast‐enhanced vessel wall MRI.Evidence Level1Technical EfficacyStage 3

Editorial for “Value of Non‐Contrast‐Enhanced Vessel Wall MR Imaging in Assessing Vascular Invasion of Retroperitoneal Tumors”

“…Previous studies have demonstrated the ability of vessel wall MRI to detect and monitor atherosclerotic plaques, enhancing the understanding of the disease pathophysiology. 7,8 In this issue of JMRI, Peng et al 9 creatively evaluated the extent of vessel wall invasion in malignant retroperitoneal tumors using non-contrast-enhanced vessel wall imaging, which was validated against surgical confirmation and pathological results. In this study, the degree of vascular wall invasion was classified into five categories, based on the spatial association between the tumor and the vessel wall, as well as the morphology and signal of the vessel wall.…”