Literature DB >> 24360516

Diffusion-weighted breast imaging at 3 T: preliminary experience.

L Nogueira1, S Brandão2, E Matos2, R G Nunes2, H A Ferreira2, J Loureiro2, I Ramos2.   

Abstract

AIM: To evaluate the performance of diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) at 3 T for the detection and characterization of breast lesions.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the breast, including DWI single-shot spin-echo echo planar images (SS-SE-EPI; eight b-values, 50-3000 s/mm(2)), were acquired in women with a clinical indication for breast MRI. The exclusion criteria were as follows: (1) previous breast surgery, radiotherapy and/or chemotherapy within the prior 48 months (14 women); (2) only cystic lesions (one woman); (3) no detectable enhancing lesion at dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE)-MRI (15 women); and (4) breast implants (four women). MRI results were corroborated by histopathology or imaging follow-up. Apparent diffusion coefficients (ADCs) were estimated for lesions and normal glandular tissue. Differences in the ADC between tissue types were evaluated and the sensitivity and specificity of the method calculated by receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curves.
RESULTS: The final cohort comprised 53 patients with 59 lesions. Histopathology was obtained for 58 lesions. One lesion was validated as benign on imaging follow-up. Mean ADCs of 1.99 ± 0.27 × 10(-3) mm(2)/s, 1.08 ± 0.25 × 10(-3) mm(2)/s, and 1.74 ± 0.35 × 10(-3) mm(2)/s were obtained for normal tissue, malignant, and benign lesions, respectively. Mean ADCs of malignancies were significantly lower than those of benign lesions (p < 0.001) and normal tissue (p < 0.0001). The sensitivity and specificity for stratifying lesions, considering an ADC threshold of 1.41 × 10(-3) mm(2)/s, were 94.3% and 87.5%, respectively; accuracy was 91.5%.
CONCLUSION: DWI proved useful for the detection and characterization of breast lesions in the present sample. ADC values provide a high diagnostic performance for differentiation between benign and malignant lesions.
Copyright © 2013 The Royal College of Radiologists. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24360516     DOI: 10.1016/j.crad.2013.11.005

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Radiol        ISSN: 0009-9260            Impact factor:   2.350


  6 in total

1.  Short tau inversion recovery in breast diffusion-weighted imaging: signal-to-noise ratio and apparent diffusion coefficients using a breast phantom in comparison with spectral attenuated inversion recovery.

Authors:  Tsukasa Yoshida; Atsushi Urikura; Kensei Shirata; Yoshihiro Nakaya; Masahiro Endo; Shingo Terashima; Yoichiro Hosokawa
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2017-12-11       Impact factor: 3.469

2.  Diffusion-weighted MRI for Unenhanced Breast Cancer Screening.

Authors:  Nita Amornsiripanitch; Sebastian Bickelhaupt; Hee Jung Shin; Madeline Dang; Habib Rahbar; Katja Pinker; Savannah C Partridge
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2019-10-08       Impact factor: 11.105

3.  Predicting liver metastasis of gastrointestinal tract cancer by diffusion-weighted imaging of apparent diffusion coefficient values.

Authors:  De-Xian Zheng; Shu-Chun Meng; Qing-Jun Liu; Chuan-Ting Li; Xi-Dan Shang; Yu-Seng Zhu; Tian-Jun Bai; Shi-Ming Xu
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2016-03-14       Impact factor: 5.742

4.  Differential diagnosis of plasma cell mastitis and invasive ductal carcinoma using multiparametric MRI.

Authors:  Rong Chen; Baoquan Hu; Yulong Zhang; Caibao Liu; Lianhua Zhao; Yan Jiang; Yan Xu
Journal:  Gland Surg       Date:  2020-04

5.  Preoperative axillary staging with 3.0-T breast MRI: clinical value of diffusion imaging and apparent diffusion coefficient.

Authors:  Suvi Rautiainen; Mervi Könönen; Reijo Sironen; Amro Masarwah; Mazen Sudah; Juhana Hakumäki; Ritva Vanninen; Anna Sutela
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-03-30       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Diffusion-Weighted Imaging in 3.0 Tesla Breast MRI: Diagnostic Performance and Tumor Characterization Using Small Subregions vs. Whole Tumor Regions of Interest.

Authors:  Otso Arponen; Otso Arponent; Mazen Sudah; Amro Masarwah; Mikko Taina; Suvi Rautiainen; Mervi Könönen; Reijo Sironen; Veli-Matti Kosma; Anna Sutela; Juhana Hakumäki; Ritva Vanninen
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-10-12       Impact factor: 3.240

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.