Zhenghua Liu1, Haibo Liao, Jianhua Yin, Yanfang Li. 1. The Department of Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Medical Image Center, the Second Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, 1, Minde Road, Donghu District, Nanchang, China, 330006, wuxiaoshui@126.com.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the usefulness of the R2* value in assessing the histopathological grade of glioma at magnetic resonance imaging and differentiating various brain tumours. METHODS: Sixty-four patients with brain tumours underwent R2* mapping and diffusion-weighted imaging examinations. ANOVA was performed to analyse R2* values among four groups of glioma and among high-grade gliomas (grades III and IV), low-grade gliomas (grades I and II), meningiomas, and brain metastasis. Spearman's correlation coefficients were used to determine the relationships between the R2* values or apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) and the histopathological grade of gliomas. R2* values of low- and high-grade gliomas were analysed with the receiver-operator characteristic curve. RESULTS: R2* values were significantly different among high-grade gliomas, low-grade gliomas, meningiomas, and brain metastasis, but not between grade I and grade II or between grade III and grade IV. The R2* value (18.73) of high-grade gliomas provided a very high sensitivity and specificity for differentiating low-grade gliomas. A strong correlation existed between the R2* value and the pathological grade of gliomas. CONCLUSIONS: R2* mapping is a useful sequence for determining grade of gliomas and in distinguishing benign from malignant tumours. R2* values are better than ADC for characterising gliomas. KEY POINTS: • Magnetic resonance imaging parameters are increasingly used to assess cerebral lesions. • R2* values are better than diffusion weighting for characterising gliomas. • R2* values can help distinguish among different grades of glioma. • Significant difference existed in R2* values between high- and low-grade gliomas.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the usefulness of the R2* value in assessing the histopathological grade of glioma at magnetic resonance imaging and differentiating various brain tumours. METHODS: Sixty-four patients with brain tumours underwent R2* mapping and diffusion-weighted imaging examinations. ANOVA was performed to analyse R2* values among four groups of glioma and among high-grade gliomas (grades III and IV), low-grade gliomas (grades I and II), meningiomas, and brain metastasis. Spearman's correlation coefficients were used to determine the relationships between the R2* values or apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) and the histopathological grade of gliomas. R2* values of low- and high-grade gliomas were analysed with the receiver-operator characteristic curve. RESULTS: R2* values were significantly different among high-grade gliomas, low-grade gliomas, meningiomas, and brain metastasis, but not between grade I and grade II or between grade III and grade IV. The R2* value (18.73) of high-grade gliomas provided a very high sensitivity and specificity for differentiating low-grade gliomas. A strong correlation existed between the R2* value and the pathological grade of gliomas. CONCLUSIONS: R2* mapping is a useful sequence for determining grade of gliomas and in distinguishing benign from malignant tumours. R2* values are better than ADC for characterising gliomas. KEY POINTS: • Magnetic resonance imaging parameters are increasingly used to assess cerebral lesions. • R2* values are better than diffusion weighting for characterising gliomas. • R2* values can help distinguish among different grades of glioma. • Significant difference existed in R2* values between high- and low-grade gliomas.
Authors: Roberto Alonzi; Anwar R Padhani; N Jane Taylor; David J Collins; James A D'Arcy; J James Stirling; Michele I Saunders; Peter J Hoskin Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2010-07-12 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Rotem S Lanzman; Phil M Robson; Maryellen R Sun; Amish D Patel; Kimiknu Mentore; Andrew A Wagner; Elizabeth M Genega; Neil M Rofsky; David C Alsop; Ivan Pedrosa Journal: Radiology Date: 2012-10-09 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Siamak P Nejad-Davarani; Niloufar Zakariaei; Yongsheng Chen; E Mark Haacke; Newton J Hurst; M Salim Siddiqui; Lonni R Schultz; James M Snyder; Tobias Walbert; Carri K Glide-Hurst Journal: Med Phys Date: 2020-07-06 Impact factor: 4.071