Table 4 Advantages and Weaknesses 3D EAUS versus MRI
From: Radiological assessment of anal cancer: an overview and update
Technique | 3D EAUS | MRI |
|---|---|---|
Advantages | Easier; quicker; low cost and better tolerated by patients | MRI is the gold standard in oncological pelvic examination, providing morphological and functional data |
Disadvantages | The accuracy of US varies according to the operator skill; small field of view | Expensive, poorly tolerated by the patient, long time for the examination |
T stage | More accurate for T1 than MRI and to asses relationship between lesion and sphincteric plan | MRI is a valuable diagnostic tool in anal cancer staging, although the major limitation is an incorrect detection of T1 patients |
N stage | Only N1, so EAUS should be supplemented by MRI since US has a limited field of view. | Effective assessment of lymph nodes status thanks to morphological and functional data by DWI. |
Post Treatment Assessment | EAUS did not provide any advantage over DRE in identifying local recurrence, and should not be recommended for routine surveillance | MR imaging plays an important role in therapeutic assessment, properly stratify patients into responders or non responders to neoadjuvant treatment, surveillance after surgery, and evaluation of suspected disease fall-out |