BACKGROUND: This study aimed to investigate the efficacy of quantitative apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) measurement in the differential diagnosis of the uterine endometrial cavity tumors (UECT). METHODS: This study included consecutive 36 female patients with UECT. The groups were formed as follows: group 1, patients with endometrial carcinoma; group 2, patients with endometrial polyp; group 3, patients with submucosal leiomyoma; and additionally group A, patients with malignant lesion; group B patients with benign lesion. Tumoral and outer myometrial ADC values were measured and the tumor-myometrium ADC ratios were calculated in all patients. Kolmogorov-Smirnov tests were used to test the normality of the data distributions. The data were not normally distributed, and therefore, nonparametric tests were performed. The cut-off values, sensitivity, and specificity were determined by the receiver operating characteristic analysis. RESULTS: The mean ADC value and ratio of group 1 were lower than that of group 2 and 3, and the mean ADC value and ratio of group 3 were lower than that of group 2. The sensitivity and specificity for group 1, 2, and 3 were as follows: 90, 100, and 66.7 %; and 81.8, 88, and 58.8 %, respectively, in terms of the ADC values; 90, 100 and 67 %; and 77.3, 96, and 64.7 % in terms of the ADC ratios. Statistically significant differences were demonstrated between group A and B in terms of mean tumoral ADC values and ratios. Sensitivity and specificity were found to be 90 and 81.8 %, respectively, in terms of the ADC values. The sensitivity and specificity were found to be 90 and 77.3 %, respectively, in terms of the ADC ratios. CONCLUSIONS: ADC values and ratios represent a promising parameter in the determination of the tumoral lesions in patients with UECT.
BACKGROUND: This study aimed to investigate the efficacy of quantitative apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) measurement in the differential diagnosis of the uterine endometrial cavity tumors (UECT). METHODS: This study included consecutive 36 female patients with UECT. The groups were formed as follows: group 1, patients with endometrial carcinoma; group 2, patients with endometrial polyp; group 3, patients with submucosal leiomyoma; and additionally group A, patients with malignant lesion; group B patients with benign lesion. Tumoral and outer myometrial ADC values were measured and the tumor-myometrium ADC ratios were calculated in all patients. Kolmogorov-Smirnov tests were used to test the normality of the data distributions. The data were not normally distributed, and therefore, nonparametric tests were performed. The cut-off values, sensitivity, and specificity were determined by the receiver operating characteristic analysis. RESULTS: The mean ADC value and ratio of group 1 were lower than that of group 2 and 3, and the mean ADC value and ratio of group 3 were lower than that of group 2. The sensitivity and specificity for group 1, 2, and 3 were as follows: 90, 100, and 66.7 %; and 81.8, 88, and 58.8 %, respectively, in terms of the ADC values; 90, 100 and 67 %; and 77.3, 96, and 64.7 % in terms of the ADC ratios. Statistically significant differences were demonstrated between group A and B in terms of mean tumoral ADC values and ratios. Sensitivity and specificity were found to be 90 and 81.8 %, respectively, in terms of the ADC values. The sensitivity and specificity were found to be 90 and 77.3 %, respectively, in terms of the ADC ratios. CONCLUSIONS: ADC values and ratios represent a promising parameter in the determination of the tumoral lesions in patients with UECT.
Authors: T Sugahara; Y Korogi; M Kochi; I Ikushima; Y Shigematu; T Hirai; T Okuda; L Liang; Y Ge; Y Komohara; Y Ushio; M Takahashi Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 1999-01 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Eleni Liapi; Ihab R Kamel; David A Bluemke; Michael A Jacobs; Hyun S Kim Journal: J Comput Assist Tomogr Date: 2005 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 1.826
Authors: K M Gauvain; R C McKinstry; P Mukherjee; A Perry; J J Neil; B A Kaufman; R J Hayashi Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2001-08 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Jignesh Patel; Eric E Sigmund; Henry Rusinek; Marcel Oei; James S Babb; Bachir Taouli Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2010-03 Impact factor: 4.813