Abstract
Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), computed tomography (CT), and intravesical ultrasound (US) scanning were performed on 11 patients in whom infiltrative bladder cancer was suspected at cystoscopy. Equipment with magnetic field 0.02 T was used for the MRI. Tumors larger than 2 cm could be identified in all cases by MRI. In 3 of 4 cases in which the tumor was smaller than 2 cm, it could not be properly visualized and the degree of infiltration could not be assessed. When the tumor was visualized on MRI, tumor staging by MRI was correct in 7 of 8 cases (88%). Infiltration of the deep muscle layer of the bladder wall could be detected by MRI but not by CT. Intravesical US staging was correct in 7 of9 cases (78%). As a noninvasive method, MRI is promising for the preoperative evaluation of bladder cancer and offers the advantage of imaging the bladder in different planes.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Koss JC, Arger PH, Coleman BG, Mulhern CB, Pollack HM, Wein AJ: CT staging of bladder carcinoma.AJR 13:359–362, 1981
Morgan CL, Calkins RF, Cavalcanti EJ: Computed tomography in the evaluation, staging, and therapy of carcinoma of the bladder and prostate.Radiology 140:751–761, 1981
Salo JO, Kivisaari L, Lehtonen T: CT in determining the depth of infiltration of bladder tumors.Urol Radiol 7:88–93, 1985
Nakamura S, Niijima, T: Staging of bladder cancer by ultrasonography: a new technique by transurethral intravesical scanning.J Urol 124:341–344, 1980
Schüller J, Walther V, Schmiedt E, Staehler G, Bauer HW, Schilling A: Intravesical ultrasound tomography in staging bladder carcinoma.J Urol 128:264–266, 1982
Jaeger N, Radeke H-W, Adolphs H-H, Penkert A, Bertermann H, Vahlensieck W: Value of intravesical sonography in tumor classification of bladder carcinoma.Eur Urol 12:76–84, 1986
Hricak H, Williams RD, Spring DB, Moow KL Jr, Hedgock MW, Watson RA, Crooks LE: Anatomy and pathology of the male pelvis by magnetic resonance imaging.AJR 141:1101–1110, 1983
Hamlin DJ, Pettersson H, Johnson JO, Fitzsimmons JR: Advances in magnetic resonance imaging of the pelvis at 0.15 tesla.Acta Radiol Diagn 27:369–377, 1986
Fisher MR, Hricak H, Tanagho EA: Urinary bladder MR imaging. Part II. Neoplasm.Radiology 157:471–477, 1985
Amendola MA, Glazer GM, Grossman HB, Aisen AM, Francis IR: Staging of bladder carcinoma; MRI-CT-surgical correlation.AJR 146:1179–1183, 1986
Rholl KS, Lee JKT, Heiken JP, Ling D, Glazer HS: Primary bladder carcinoma: evaluation with MR imaging.Radiology 163:117–121, 1987
Kenny GM, Hardner GJ, Murphy GP: Clinical staging of bladder tumors.J Urol 104:720–723, 1970
Prout GR Jr: Classification and staging of bladder carcinoma.Semin Oncol 6:189–197, 1979
Barentsz JO, Lemmens JAM, Boskamp EB, Rosenbosch G, Ruijs JHJ: Improved MR imaging of the bladder by using a new surface coil.RöFo 145:351–353, 1986
Budinger TF: Nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) in vivo studies: known thresholds for health effects.J Comput Assist Tomogr 5:800–811, 1981
Davis DL, Crooks LE, Arakauc M, McKee R, Kaufman L, Margulis AR: Potential hazards in NMR imaging: heating effect of changing magnetic fields in small metallic implants.AJR 137:857–860, 1981
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Salo, J.O., Kivisaari, L. & Lehtonen, T. Comparison of magnetic resonance imaging with computed tomography and intravesical ultrasound in staging bladder cancer. Urol Radiol 10, 167–172 (1988). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02926562
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02926562