Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2026 Jan 29.
doi: 10.1007/s00330-025-12274-w. Online ahead of print.

MRI to guide clinical management of rectal cancer: updated consensus recommendations from the European Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology (ESGAR)-PART I primary staging

Collaborators

MRI to guide clinical management of rectal cancer: updated consensus recommendations from the European Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology (ESGAR)-PART I primary staging

ESGAR Rectal Imaging Guideline Group. Eur Radiol. .

Abstract

Objectives: To provide up-to-date consensus recommendations on the acquisition, interpretation and reporting of MRI for the primary staging of rectal cancer.

Materials and methods: A panel of twenty-six abdominal imaging experts from the European Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology (ESGAR) engaged in an online consensus process, led by three non-voting chairs. The process adhered to an adapted version of the RAND-UCLA appropriateness method. A total of 126 items were scored (22 general, 55 on primary staging, 49 on restaging after neoadjuvant treatment) and classified using ≥ 80% as the cut-off to establish consensus.

Results: Consensus was reached for 121 items (96%). The current manuscript addresses the resulting general recommendations and those focused on baseline staging. Key updates compared to the previous guideline editions include more detailed recommendations for image acquisition, adoption of the sigmoid take-off as a landmark to discern rectal from sigmoid cancer, updated definition of mesorectal fascia involvement by a distance of ≤ 1 mm, including involvement by irregular nodes and extramural vascular invasion; a transition to a patient-level approach for cN-category assessment with updated criteria for lateral nodes including a ≥ 7 mm size threshold, and recommendations on the limited use of DWI for primary staging.

Conclusions: These updated expert consensus recommendations serve as clinical guidelines for the primary staging of rectal cancer using MRI. Recommendations for restaging and response evaluation after neoadjuvant treatment are addressed in a separate publication.

Key points: Question Since the last ESGAR rectal imaging guideline update, the rectal cancer treatment landscape has further evolved, necessitating updates to the existing guidelines. Findings An online consensus process involving 26 panellists led to 96% consensus across 121 items discussed, including 22 general items and 55 related to primary staging. Clinical relevance Key updates related to primary staging include more detailed recommendations for image acquisition, adoption of the sigmoid take-off, refined criteria for MRF involvement, a new patient-level approach for cN-assessment, and recommendations on the limited use of DWI.

Keywords: Clinical guidelines; Magnetic resonance imaging; Primary staging; Rectal cancer.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Compliance with ethical standards. Guarantor: The scientific guarantor of this publication is Doenja M.J. Lambregts. Conflict of interest: R.B.-T. and D.L. are members of the Scientific Editorial Board of European Radiology (sections: Oncology and Gastrointestinal-Abdominal, respectively) and, as such, have not participated in the selection or review processes for this article. The remaining authors of this manuscript declare no relationships with any companies, whose products or services may be related to the subject matter of the article. Statistics and biometry: No complex statistical methods were necessary for this paper. Informed consent: Not applicable (consensus guideline). Ethical approval: Institutional Review Board approval was not applicable because this manuscript concerns a consensus guideline. Study subjects or cohorts overlap: Not applicable (consensus guideline). Methodology: Consensus-based guideline

Comment in

References

    1. Beets-Tan RG, Lambregts DM, Maas M et al (2013) Magnetic resonance imaging for the clinical management of rectal cancer patients: recommendations from the 2012 European Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology (ESGAR) consensus meeting. Eur Radiol 23:2522–2531 - PubMed
    1. Beets-Tan RGH, Lambregts DMJ, Maas M et al (2018) Magnetic resonance imaging for clinical management of rectal cancer: Updated recommendations from the 2016 European Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology (ESGAR) consensus meeting. Eur Radiol 28:1465–1475 - PubMed
    1. ESGAR rectal imaging guideline group (2026) MRI to guide clinical management of rectal cancer: updated consensus recommendations from the European Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology (ESGAR)—PART II restaging and response evaluation. Eur Radiol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-025-12275-9
    1. Plumb AAO, Lambregts D, Bellini D, Stoker J, Taylor S, ESGAR Research Committee (2019) Making useful clinical guidelines: the ESGAR perspective. Eur Radiol 29:3757–3760 - PubMed - PMC
    1. Viktil E, Hanekamp BA, Nesbakken A et al (2024) Early rectal cancer: the diagnostic performance of MRI supplemented with a rectal micro-enema and a modified staging system to identify tumors eligible for local excision. Acta Radiol Open 13:20584601241241523 - PubMed - PMC

LinkOut - more resources