OBJECTIVES: To assess whether diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (DW-MRI) including bi-exponential fitting helps to detect residual/recurrent tumours after (chemo)radiotherapy of laryngeal and hypopharyngeal carcinoma. METHODS: Forty-six patients with newly-developed/worsening symptoms after (chemo)radiotherapy for laryngeal/hypopharyngeal cancers were prospectively imaged using conventional MRI and axial DW-MRI. Qualitative (visual assessment) and quantitative analysis (mono-exponentially: total apparent diffusion coefficient [ADC(T)], and bi-exponentially: perfusion fraction [F(P)] and true diffusion coefficient [ADC(D)]) were performed. Diffusion parameters of tumour versus post-therapeutic changes were compared, with final diagnosis based on histopathology and follow-up. Mann-Whitney U test was used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: Qualitative DW-MRI combined with morphological images allowed the detection of tumour with a sensitivity of 94% and specificity 100%. ADC(T) and ADC(D) values were lower in tumour with values 120 ± 49 × 10(-5) mm(2)/s and 113 ± 50 × 10(-5) mm(2)/s, respectively, compared with post-therapeutic changes with values 182 ± 41 × 10(-5) mm(2)/s (P < 0.0002) and 160 ± 47 × 10(-5) mm(2)/s (P < 0.003), respectively. F(P) values were significantly lower in tumours than in non-tumours (13 ± 9% versus 31 ± 16%, P < 0.0002), with F(P) being the best quantitative parameter for differentiation between post-therapeutic changes and recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: DW-MRI in combination with conventional MRI substantially improves detection and exclusion of tumour in patients with laryngeal and hypopharyngeal cancers after treatment with (chemo)radiotherapy on both qualitative and quantitative analysis, with F(P) being the best quantitative parameter in this context.
OBJECTIVES: To assess whether diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (DW-MRI) including bi-exponential fitting helps to detect residual/recurrent tumours after (chemo)radiotherapy of laryngeal and hypopharyngeal carcinoma. METHODS: Forty-six patients with newly-developed/worsening symptoms after (chemo)radiotherapy for laryngeal/hypopharyngeal cancers were prospectively imaged using conventional MRI and axial DW-MRI. Qualitative (visual assessment) and quantitative analysis (mono-exponentially: total apparent diffusion coefficient [ADC(T)], and bi-exponentially: perfusion fraction [F(P)] and true diffusion coefficient [ADC(D)]) were performed. Diffusion parameters of tumour versus post-therapeutic changes were compared, with final diagnosis based on histopathology and follow-up. Mann-Whitney U test was used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: Qualitative DW-MRI combined with morphological images allowed the detection of tumour with a sensitivity of 94% and specificity 100%. ADC(T) and ADC(D) values were lower in tumour with values 120 ± 49 × 10(-5) mm(2)/s and 113 ± 50 × 10(-5) mm(2)/s, respectively, compared with post-therapeutic changes with values 182 ± 41 × 10(-5) mm(2)/s (P < 0.0002) and 160 ± 47 × 10(-5) mm(2)/s (P < 0.003), respectively. F(P) values were significantly lower in tumours than in non-tumours (13 ± 9% versus 31 ± 16%, P < 0.0002), with F(P) being the best quantitative parameter for differentiation between post-therapeutic changes and recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: DW-MRI in combination with conventional MRI substantially improves detection and exclusion of tumour in patients with laryngeal and hypopharyngeal cancers after treatment with (chemo)radiotherapy on both qualitative and quantitative analysis, with F(P) being the best quantitative parameter in this context.
Authors: Harriet C Thoeny; Dominik Zumstein; Sonja Simon-Zoula; Ute Eisenberger; Frederik De Keyzer; Lucie Hofmann; Peter Vock; Chris Boesch; Felix J Frey; Peter Vermathen Journal: Radiology Date: 2006-12 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Vincent Vandecaveye; Frederik De Keyzer; Sandra Nuyts; Karen Deraedt; Piet Dirix; Pascal Hamaekers; Vincent Vander Poorten; Pierre Delaere; Robert Hermans Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2006-12-04 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Vincent Vandecaveye; Piet Dirix; Frederik De Keyzer; Katya Op de Beeck; Vincent Vander Poorten; Esther Hauben; Maarten Lambrecht; Sandra Nuyts; Robert Hermans Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2011-04-20 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: V Vandecaveye; F de Keyzer; V Vander Poorten; K Deraedt; H Alaerts; W Landuyt; S Nuyts; R Hermans Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2006-04-26 Impact factor: 3.039
Authors: Peter Zbären; Andreas Christe; Marco D Caversaccio; Edouard Stauffer; Harriet C Thoeny Journal: Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg Date: 2007-09 Impact factor: 3.497
Authors: Andreas Lemke; Frederik B Laun; Miriam Klauss; Thomas J Re; Dirk Simon; Stefan Delorme; Lothar R Schad; Bram Stieltjes Journal: Invest Radiol Date: 2009-12 Impact factor: 6.016
Authors: Vincent Lai; Xiao Li; Victor Ho Fun Lee; Ka On Lam; Daniel Yee Tak Fong; Bingsheng Huang; Queenie Chan; Pek Lan Khong Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2013-08-29 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Charlotte S Schouten; Otto S Hoekstra; C René Leemans; Jonas A Castelijns; Remco de Bree Journal: Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol Date: 2014-11-06 Impact factor: 2.503
Authors: Robert H Press; Hui-Kuo G Shu; Hyunsuk Shim; James M Mountz; Brenda F Kurland; Richard L Wahl; Ella F Jones; Nola M Hylton; Elizabeth R Gerstner; Robert J Nordstrom; Lori Henderson; Karen A Kurdziel; Bhadrasain Vikram; Michael A Jacobs; Matthias Holdhoff; Edward Taylor; David A Jaffray; Lawrence H Schwartz; David A Mankoff; Paul E Kinahan; Hannah M Linden; Philippe Lambin; Thomas J Dilling; Daniel L Rubin; Lubomir Hadjiiski; John M Buatti Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2018-06-30 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Arthur Varoquaux; Olivier Rager; Karl-Olof Lovblad; Karen Masterson; Pavel Dulguerov; Osman Ratib; Christoph D Becker; Minerva Becker Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2013-02-22 Impact factor: 9.236