PURPOSE: To evaluate which mathematical model (monoexponential, biexponential, statistical, kurtosis) fits best to the diffusion-weighted signal in prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). MATERIALS AND METHODS: 24 prostate 3-T MRI examinations of young volunteers (YV, n=8), patients with biopsy proven prostate cancer (PC, n=8) and an aged matched control group (AC, n=8) were included. Diffusion-weighted imaging was performed using 11 b-values ranging from 0 to 800 s/mm(2). RESULTS: Monoexponential apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values were significantly (P<.001) lower in the peripheral (PZ) zone (1.18±0.16 mm(2)/s) and the central (CZ) zone (0.73±0.13 mm(2)/s) of YV compared to AC (PZ 1.92±0.17 mm(2)/s; CZ 1.35±0.21 mm(2)/s). In PC ADC(mono) values (0.61±0.06 mm(2)/s) were significantly (P<.001) lower than in the peripheral of central zone of AC. Using the statistical analysis (Akaike information criteria) in YV most pixels were best described by the biexponential model (82%), the statistical model, respectively kurtosis (93%) each compared to the monoexponential model. In PC the majority of pixels was best described by the monoexponential model (57%) compared to the biexponential model. CONCLUSION: Although a more complex model might provide a better fitting when multiple b-values are used, the monoexponential analyses for ADC calculation in prostate MRI is sufficient to discriminate prostate cancer from normal tissue using b-values ranging from 0 to 800 s/mm(2).
PURPOSE: To evaluate which mathematical model (monoexponential, biexponential, statistical, kurtosis) fits best to the diffusion-weighted signal in prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). MATERIALS AND METHODS: 24 prostate 3-T MRI examinations of young volunteers (YV, n=8), patients with biopsy proven prostate cancer (PC, n=8) and an aged matched control group (AC, n=8) were included. Diffusion-weighted imaging was performed using 11 b-values ranging from 0 to 800 s/mm(2). RESULTS: Monoexponential apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values were significantly (P<.001) lower in the peripheral (PZ) zone (1.18±0.16 mm(2)/s) and the central (CZ) zone (0.73±0.13 mm(2)/s) of YV compared to AC (PZ 1.92±0.17 mm(2)/s; CZ 1.35±0.21 mm(2)/s). In PC ADC(mono) values (0.61±0.06 mm(2)/s) were significantly (P<.001) lower than in the peripheral of central zone of AC. Using the statistical analysis (Akaike information criteria) in YV most pixels were best described by the biexponential model (82%), the statistical model, respectively kurtosis (93%) each compared to the monoexponential model. In PC the majority of pixels was best described by the monoexponential model (57%) compared to the biexponential model. CONCLUSION: Although a more complex model might provide a better fitting when multiple b-values are used, the monoexponential analyses for ADC calculation in prostate MRI is sufficient to discriminate prostate cancer from normal tissue using b-values ranging from 0 to 800 s/mm(2).
Authors: Michael Quentin; Lars Schimmöller; Christian Arsov; Robert Rabenalt; Gerald Antoch; Peter Albers; Dirk Blondin Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2013-08-31 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Fredrik Langkilde; Thiele Kobus; Andriy Fedorov; Ruth Dunne; Clare Tempany; Robert V Mulkern; Stephan E Maier Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2017-07-17 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Andrew B Rosenkrantz; Hersh Chandarana; Nicole Hindman; Fang-Ming Deng; James S Babb; Samir S Taneja; Christian Geppert Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2013-06-12 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Andriy Fedorov; Kemal Tuncali; Lawrence P Panych; Janice Fairhurst; Elmira Hassanzadeh; Ravi T Seethamraju; Clare M Tempany; Stephan E Maier Journal: Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2016-05-27 Impact factor: 2.546
Authors: Leonardo K Bittencourt; Ulrike I Attenberger; Daniel Lima; Ralph Strecker; Andre de Oliveira; Stefan O Schoenberg; Emerson L Gasparetto; Daniel Hausmann Journal: World J Radiol Date: 2014-06-28
Authors: Gene Young Cho; Linda Moy; Sungheon G Kim; Steven H Baete; Melanie Moccaldi; James S Babb; Daniel K Sodickson; Eric E Sigmund Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2015-11-28 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Gene Young Cho; Linda Moy; Jeff L Zhang; Steven Baete; Riccardo Lattanzi; Melanie Moccaldi; James S Babb; Sungheon Kim; Daniel K Sodickson; Eric E Sigmund Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2014-10-09 Impact factor: 4.668