PURPOSE: We obtained intravoxel incoherent motion (IVIM) parameters through biexponential analysis on diffusion-weighted MR imaging (DWI) using multiple b values. Correlation was evaluated between these parameters and histological microvessel density (MVD) for the possibility of noninvasive evaluation of MVD with DWI. METHODS: Twenty-five nude mice with the HT29 colorectal cancer cells implanted were analyzed after undergoing DWI with multiple b values (0, 50, 100, 300, 500, 700, and 1000 s/mm(2)). Tissue diffusivity (D(t)), pseudo-diffusion coefficient (D(p)), and perfusion fraction (f(p)) were calculated using a biexponential analysis, and these parameters were correlated with MVD. The MVD was determined with the CD31 stain. For statistical analysis, Spearman's rank correlation was applied. RESULTS: The mean value and correlation coefficient with MVD for each IVIM parameter were as follows: D(t) = 0.98 ± 0.06 × 10(-3) mm(2)/s with r = 0.139 (P = 0.508); D(p) = 23.70 ± 7.94 × 10(-3) mm(2)/s with r = 0.782 (P < 0.001); and f(p) = 15.58 ± 5.7% with r = 0.749 (P < 0.001). D(p) and f(p) showed significant correlation with MVD, but D(t) did not. CONCLUSION: The IVIM parameters, D(p) and f(p), on DWI might be used in the noninvasive evaluation of MVD.
PURPOSE: We obtained intravoxel incoherent motion (IVIM) parameters through biexponential analysis on diffusion-weighted MR imaging (DWI) using multiple b values. Correlation was evaluated between these parameters and histological microvessel density (MVD) for the possibility of noninvasive evaluation of MVD with DWI. METHODS: Twenty-five nude mice with the HT29 colorectal cancer cells implanted were analyzed after undergoing DWI with multiple b values (0, 50, 100, 300, 500, 700, and 1000 s/mm(2)). Tissue diffusivity (D(t)), pseudo-diffusion coefficient (D(p)), and perfusion fraction (f(p)) were calculated using a biexponential analysis, and these parameters were correlated with MVD. The MVD was determined with the CD31 stain. For statistical analysis, Spearman's rank correlation was applied. RESULTS: The mean value and correlation coefficient with MVD for each IVIM parameter were as follows: D(t) = 0.98 ± 0.06 × 10(-3) mm(2)/s with r = 0.139 (P = 0.508); D(p) = 23.70 ± 7.94 × 10(-3) mm(2)/s with r = 0.782 (P < 0.001); and f(p) = 15.58 ± 5.7% with r = 0.749 (P < 0.001). D(p) and f(p) showed significant correlation with MVD, but D(t) did not. CONCLUSION: The IVIM parameters, D(p) and f(p), on DWI might be used in the noninvasive evaluation of MVD.
Authors: K Kikuchi; A Hiwatashi; O Togao; K Yamashita; R Kamei; D Momosaka; N Hata; K Iihara; S O Suzuki; T Iwaki; H Honda Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2019-04-25 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Z Xiao; Z Tang; J Qiang; S Wang; W Qian; Y Zhong; R Wang; J Wang; L Wu; W Tang; Z Zhang Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2018-01-25 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: P Mürtz; A M Sprinkart; M Reick; C C Pieper; A-H Schievelkamp; R König; H H Schild; W A Willinek; G M Kukuk Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2018-04-18 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Christian Eberhardt; Moritz C Wurnig; Andrea Wirsching; Cristina Rossi; Markus Rottmar; Pinar S Özbay; Lukas Filli; Mickael Lesurtel; Andreas Boss Journal: MAGMA Date: 2016-04-19 Impact factor: 2.310