Skip to main content

Some NLM-NCBI services and products are experiencing heavy traffic, which may affect performance and availability. We apologize for the inconvenience and appreciate your patience. For assistance, please contact our Help Desk at info@ncbi.nlm.nih.gov.

AJNR: American Journal of Neuroradiology logoLink to AJNR: American Journal of Neuroradiology
. 1991 Mar-Apr;12(2):293-300.

Diagnosis of cerebral metastases: double-dose delayed CT vs contrast-enhanced MR imaging.

P C Davis 1, P A Hudgins 1, S B Peterman 1, J C Hoffman Jr 1
PMCID: PMC8331419  PMID: 1902031

Abstract

For patients suspected of having cerebral metastases, double-dose delayed CT (DDD-CT) has proved significantly more sensitive than CT scans obtained immediately after administration of a lesser dose of iodinated contrast material. Previous reports confirm the advantages of postcontrast MR imaging over contrast-enhanced CT, but data comparing DDD-CT and contrast-enhanced MR have not been reported. This study describes comparative imaging results in 23 patients who had contrast-enhanced MR imaging to clarify equivocal findings on DDD-CT studies. Contrast-enhanced MR demonstrated more than 67 definite or typical parenchymal metastases. T2-weighted MR revealed more than 40, while DDD-CT revealed only 37 typical metastatic lesions. Three patients had five or fewer lesions on DDD-CT and lesions "too numerous to count" on MR. The frequency of equivocal or unconvincing lesions was similar on DDD-CT (11) and contrast-enhanced MR (10). On T2-weighted images, we noted a substantially higher number of equivocal lesions (19), fewer definite metastases, and a number of definite metastases that had no corresponding lesion on the enhanced studies, confirming the inability of T2-weighted imaging to specifically identify cerebral metastases. In one case, multiple tiny lesions on T2-weighted images were not apparent on DDD-CT scans and were recognized only in retrospect on contrast-enhanced MR images. In this series, MR with enhancement proved superior to DDD-CT for lesion detection, anatomic localization of lesions, and differentiation of solitary vs multiple lesions. Cost-benefit considerations precluded a comparison between the two techniques in all patients suspected of having cerebral metastases.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (5.4 MB).


Articles from AJNR: American Journal of Neuroradiology are provided here courtesy of American Society of Neuroradiology

RESOURCES