Literature DB >> 2170860

CT and MR assessment of tumors of the nose and paranasal sinuses, the nasopharynx and the parapharyngeal space using ROC methodology.

M G Hunink1, R G de Slegte, G J Gerritsen, H Speelman.   

Abstract

Neoplastic disease of the nose and paranasal sinuses, the nasopharynx and the parapharyngeal space requires thorough assessment of location and extension in order to plan appropriate treatment. This study evaluates computer tomography and magnetic resonance imaging in the workup of malignant and non-malignant tumors of the nose and paranasal sinuses, the nasopharynx and the parapharyngeal space in 76 patients. An attempt is made to characterize histopathology on magnetic resonance images by analyzing the signal intensities on T1- and T2-weighted images relative to muscle and brain tissue. The test performance of computer tomography and magnetic resonance imaging in the assessment of tumor extension are compared with receiver operating characteristic methodology. Although no definitive conclusions can be made as to the histopathology on the basis of the signal intensities on magnetic resonance imaging, some tumors show characteristic images. Receiver operating characteristic analysis of the performance of computer tomography and magnetic resonance imaging in the assessment of extension of neoplastic disease of the nose and paranasal sinuses, the nasopharynx and the parapharyngeal space, demonstrates no statistically significant difference in overall test performance. However, in evaluating regions involving predominantly soft tissue structures and comparatively large bony structures magnetic resonance imaging is superior to computer tomography, whereas in evaluating regions involving thin bony structures, computer tomography performs better than magnetic resonance imaging.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1990        PMID: 2170860     DOI: 10.1007/BF00589116

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neuroradiology        ISSN: 0028-3940            Impact factor:   2.804


  10 in total

Review 1.  ROC methodology in radiologic imaging.

Authors:  C E Metz
Journal:  Invest Radiol       Date:  1986-09       Impact factor: 6.016

2.  Assessment of radiologic tests: control of bias and other design considerations.

Authors:  C B Begg; B J McNeil
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1988-05       Impact factor: 11.105

3.  Alternative approaches to receiver operating characteristic analyses.

Authors:  J A Hanley
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1988-08       Impact factor: 11.105

4.  A Visicalc program for estimating the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve.

Authors:  R M Centor
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  1985       Impact factor: 2.583

5.  An evaluation of methods for estimating the area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve.

Authors:  R M Centor; J S Schwartz
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  1985       Impact factor: 2.583

6.  Maximum likelihood estimation of parameters of signal detection theory--a direct solution.

Authors:  D D Dorfman; E Alf
Journal:  Psychometrika       Date:  1968-03       Impact factor: 2.500

7.  A method of comparing the areas under receiver operating characteristic curves derived from the same cases.

Authors:  J A Hanley; B J McNeil
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1983-09       Impact factor: 11.105

8.  Assessment of diagnostic tests when disease verification is subject to selection bias.

Authors:  C B Begg; R A Greenes
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1983-03       Impact factor: 2.571

9.  The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve.

Authors:  J A Hanley; B J McNeil
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1982-04       Impact factor: 11.105

10.  Magnetic resonance imaging in the evaluation of nose and paranasal sinus disease.

Authors:  G A Lloyd; V J Lund; P D Phelps; D J Howard
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  1987-10       Impact factor: 3.039

  10 in total
  1 in total

1.  Clinicopathologic study of parapharyngeal tumors.

Authors:  Mimi Gangopadhyay; Arghya Bandopadhyay; Swapan Sinha; Subrato Chakroborty
Journal:  J Cytol       Date:  2012-01       Impact factor: 1.000

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.