RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: To prospectively assess the incremental value of diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) combined with T2-weighted images (T2WI) in determining the T stage of bladder cancer by using pathologic findings as the reference standard. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study is approved by the institutional review board; informed consent was waived. The study includes 362 patients (age range, 48-87 years; mean, 71 years) who underwent 3.0-T magnetic resonance imaging and histologic examination. Three observers with varying experience levels reviewed the T2WI data alone, DWI data alone, and combined T2WI and DWI data. Sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and area under curve (AUC) were determined with the Z test after adjusting for data clustering. RESULTS: For differentiating Tis to T1 tumors from T2 to T4 tumors, the AUCs for T2WI and DWI (0.97 for observer 1 and 0.96 for observer 2) were greater than those for the DWI alone (0.92 for observer 1 and 0.90 for observer 2) (P < .05). Observer 3 had similar AUCs for T2WI and DWI compared to DWI alone. The accuracy of T2WI and DWI (observer 1, 98%; observer 2, 96%; observer 3, 92%) was greater than that of DWI alone (observer 1, 92%; observer 2, 90%; observer 3, 87%) for all observers (P < .05). The specificity of T2WI and DWI (observer 1, 100%; observer 2, 98%; observer 3, 93%) was greater than that of DWI alone (observer 1, 92%; observer 2, 90%; observer 3, 87%) for all observers (P < .05). Sensitivity was not improved even when T2WI and DWI were used. For differentiating Tis to T2 Tumors from T3 to T4 Tumors, the overall accuracy, specificity, and AUC for diagnosing T2 or higher stages were not significantly improved by combiningT2WI and DWI. CONCLUSIONS: T2WI combined with DWI can be a reliable sequence for preoperative evaluation of T stage urinary bladder cancer. It is particularly more useful in differentiating T1 or lower tumors from T2 or higher tumors compared to DWI alone.
RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: To prospectively assess the incremental value of diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) combined with T2-weighted images (T2WI) in determining the T stage of bladder cancer by using pathologic findings as the reference standard. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study is approved by the institutional review board; informed consent was waived. The study includes 362 patients (age range, 48-87 years; mean, 71 years) who underwent 3.0-T magnetic resonance imaging and histologic examination. Three observers with varying experience levels reviewed the T2WI data alone, DWI data alone, and combined T2WI and DWI data. Sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and area under curve (AUC) were determined with the Z test after adjusting for data clustering. RESULTS: For differentiating Tis to T1 tumors from T2 to T4 tumors, the AUCs for T2WI and DWI (0.97 for observer 1 and 0.96 for observer 2) were greater than those for the DWI alone (0.92 for observer 1 and 0.90 for observer 2) (P < .05). Observer 3 had similar AUCs for T2WI and DWI compared to DWI alone. The accuracy of T2WI and DWI (observer 1, 98%; observer 2, 96%; observer 3, 92%) was greater than that of DWI alone (observer 1, 92%; observer 2, 90%; observer 3, 87%) for all observers (P < .05). The specificity of T2WI and DWI (observer 1, 100%; observer 2, 98%; observer 3, 93%) was greater than that of DWI alone (observer 1, 92%; observer 2, 90%; observer 3, 87%) for all observers (P < .05). Sensitivity was not improved even when T2WI and DWI were used. For differentiating Tis to T2 Tumors from T3 to T4 Tumors, the overall accuracy, specificity, and AUC for diagnosing T2 or higher stages were not significantly improved by combiningT2WI and DWI. CONCLUSIONS: T2WI combined with DWI can be a reliable sequence for preoperative evaluation of T stage urinary bladder cancer. It is particularly more useful in differentiating T1 or lower tumors from T2 or higher tumors compared to DWI alone.
Authors: Rheal A Towner; Nataliya Smith; Debra Saunders; Samuel B Van Gordon; Amy B Wisniewski; Karl R Tyler; Beverley Greenwood-Van Meerveld; Robert E Hurst Journal: J Urol Date: 2014-11-14 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Sungmin Woo; Valeria Panebianco; Yoshifumi Narumi; Francesco Del Giudice; Valdair F Muglia; Mitsuru Takeuchi; Soleen Ghafoor; Bernard H Bochner; Alvin C Goh; Hedvig Hricak; James W F Catto; Hebert Alberto Vargas Journal: Eur Urol Oncol Date: 2020-03-19
Authors: Rima S Al Johi; Gehan S Seifeldein; Ahmed M Moeen; Noha A Aboulhagag; Ehab M Moussa; Diaa A Hameed; Hisham M Imam Journal: Cent European J Urol Date: 2017-01-16
Authors: Yubing Tong; Jayaram K Udupa; Chuang Wang; Jerry Chen; Sriram Venigalla; Thomas J Guzzo; Ronac Mamtani; Brian C Baumann; John P Christodouleas; Drew A Torigian Journal: Adv Radiat Oncol Date: 2018-05-08