PURPOSE: To assess the diagnostic accuracy of diffusion kurtosis magnetic resonance imaging parameters in grading gliomas. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The institutional review board approved this prospective study, and informed consent was obtained from all patients. Diffusion parameters-mean diffusivity (MD), fractional anisotropy (FA), mean kurtosis, and radial and axial kurtosis-were compared in the solid parts of 17 high-grade gliomas and 11 low-grade gliomas (P<.05 significance level, Mann-Whitney-Wilcoxon test, Bonferroni correction). MD, FA, mean kurtosis, radial kurtosis, and axial kurtosis in solid tumors were also normalized to the corresponding values in contralateral normal-appearing white matter (NAWM) and the contralateral posterior limb of the internal capsule (PLIC) after age correction and were compared among tumor grades. RESULTS: Mean, radial, and axial kurtosis were significantly higher in high-grade gliomas than in low-grade gliomas (P = .02, P = .015, and P = .01, respectively). FA and MD did not significantly differ between glioma grades. All values, except for axial kurtosis, that were normalized to the values in the contralateral NAWM were significantly different between high-grade and low-grade gliomas (mean kurtosis, P = .02; radial kurtosis, P = .03; FA, P = .025; and MD, P = .03). When values were normalized to those in the contralateral PLIC, none of the considered parameters showed significant differences between high-grade and low-grade gliomas. The highest sensitivity and specificity for discriminating between high-grade and low-grade gliomas were found for mean kurtosis (71% and 82%, respectively) and mean kurtosis normalized to the value in the contralateral NAWM (100% and 73%, respectively). Optimal thresholds for mean kurtosis and mean kurtosis normalized to the value in the contralateral NAWM for differentiating high-grade from low-grade gliomas were 0.52 and 0.51, respectively. CONCLUSION: There were significant differences in kurtosis parameters between high-grade and low-grade gliomas; hence, better separation was achieved with these parameters than with conventional diffusion imaging parameters.
PURPOSE: To assess the diagnostic accuracy of diffusion kurtosis magnetic resonance imaging parameters in grading gliomas. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The institutional review board approved this prospective study, and informed consent was obtained from all patients. Diffusion parameters-mean diffusivity (MD), fractional anisotropy (FA), mean kurtosis, and radial and axial kurtosis-were compared in the solid parts of 17 high-grade gliomas and 11 low-grade gliomas (P<.05 significance level, Mann-Whitney-Wilcoxon test, Bonferroni correction). MD, FA, mean kurtosis, radial kurtosis, and axial kurtosis in solid tumors were also normalized to the corresponding values in contralateral normal-appearing white matter (NAWM) and the contralateral posterior limb of the internal capsule (PLIC) after age correction and were compared among tumor grades. RESULTS: Mean, radial, and axial kurtosis were significantly higher in high-grade gliomas than in low-grade gliomas (P = .02, P = .015, and P = .01, respectively). FA and MD did not significantly differ between glioma grades. All values, except for axial kurtosis, that were normalized to the values in the contralateral NAWM were significantly different between high-grade and low-grade gliomas (mean kurtosis, P = .02; radial kurtosis, P = .03; FA, P = .025; and MD, P = .03). When values were normalized to those in the contralateral PLIC, none of the considered parameters showed significant differences between high-grade and low-grade gliomas. The highest sensitivity and specificity for discriminating between high-grade and low-grade gliomas were found for mean kurtosis (71% and 82%, respectively) and mean kurtosis normalized to the value in the contralateral NAWM (100% and 73%, respectively). Optimal thresholds for mean kurtosis and mean kurtosis normalized to the value in the contralateral NAWM for differentiating high-grade from low-grade gliomas were 0.52 and 0.51, respectively. CONCLUSION: There were significant differences in kurtosis parameters between high-grade and low-grade gliomas; hence, better separation was achieved with these parameters than with conventional diffusion imaging parameters.
Authors: M Bester; J H Jensen; J S Babb; A Tabesh; L Miles; J Herbert; R I Grossman; M Inglese Journal: Mult Scler Date: 2014-11-12 Impact factor: 6.312
Authors: M Marrale; G Collura; M Brai; N Toschi; F Midiri; G La Tona; A Lo Casto; C Gagliardo Journal: Clin Neuroradiol Date: 2015-11-20 Impact factor: 3.649
Authors: S H Faro; F B Mohamed; J A Helpern; J H Jensen; K R Thulborn; I C Atkinson; H I Sair; D J Mikulis Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2013-10-17 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Ararat Chakhoyan; Davis C Woodworth; Robert J Harris; Albert Lai; Phioanh L Nghiemphu; Linda M Liau; Whitney B Pope; Timothy F Cloughesy; Benjamin M Ellingson Journal: J Neurooncol Date: 2018-05-31 Impact factor: 4.130
Authors: Alicia W Yang; Jens H Jensen; Caixia C Hu; Ali Tabesh; Maria F Falangola; Joseph A Helpern Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2012-10-03 Impact factor: 4.813