So-Yeon Lee1,2, Won-Hee Jee3, Joon-Yong Jung1, Michael Y Park1, Sun-Ki Kim1,4, Chan-Kwon Jung5, Yang-Guk Chung6. 1. Department of Radiology, Seoul St. Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, 222 Banpo-daero, Seocho-gu, Seoul, Korea, 137-701. 2. Department of Radiology, Kangbuk Samsung Hospital, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, 108 Pyeong-dong, Jongno-gu, Seoul, Korea, 110-746. 3. Department of Radiology, Seoul St. Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, 222 Banpo-daero, Seocho-gu, Seoul, Korea, 137-701. whjee12@gmail.com. 4. Department of Radiology, Incheon St. Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, 665-8 Bupyeong6-dong, Bupyeong-gu, Incheon, Korea, 403-720. 5. Department of Pathology, Seoul St. Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, 222 Banpo-daero, Seocho-gu, Seoul, Korea, 137-701. 6. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Seoul St. Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, 222 Banpo-daero, Seocho-gu, Seoul, Korea, 137-701.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To determine the added value of diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) to standard magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to differentiate malignant from benign soft tissue tumours at 3.0 T. METHODS: 3.0 T MR images including DWI in 63 patients who underwent surgery for soft tissue tumours were retrospectively analyzed. Two readers independently interpreted MRI for the presence of malignancy in two steps: standard MRI alone, standard MRI and DWI with qualitative and quantitative analysis combined. RESULTS: There were 34 malignant and 29 non-malignant soft tissue tumours. In qualitative analysis, hyperintensity relative to skeletal muscle was more frequent in malignant than benign tumours on DWI (P=0.003). In quantitative analysis, ADCs of malignant tumours were significantly lower than those of non-malignant tumours (P≤0.002): 759±385 vs. 1188±423 μm(2)/sec minimum ADC value, 941±440 vs. 1310±440 μm(2)/sec average ADC value. The mean sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of both readers were 96%, 72%, and 85% on standard MRI alone and 97%, 90%, and 94% on standard MRI with DWI. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of DWI to standard MRI improves the diagnostic accuracy for differentiation of malignant from benign soft tissue tumours at 3.0 T. KEY POINTS: DWI has added value for differentiating malignant from benign soft tissue tumours. Addition of DWI to standard MRI at 3.0 T improves the diagnostic accuracy. Measurements of both ADC min within solid portion and ADC av are helpful.
OBJECTIVES: To determine the added value of diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) to standard magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to differentiate malignant from benign soft tissue tumours at 3.0 T. METHODS: 3.0 T MR images including DWI in 63 patients who underwent surgery for soft tissue tumours were retrospectively analyzed. Two readers independently interpreted MRI for the presence of malignancy in two steps: standard MRI alone, standard MRI and DWI with qualitative and quantitative analysis combined. RESULTS: There were 34 malignant and 29 non-malignant soft tissue tumours. In qualitative analysis, hyperintensity relative to skeletal muscle was more frequent in malignant than benign tumours on DWI (P=0.003). In quantitative analysis, ADCs of malignant tumours were significantly lower than those of non-malignant tumours (P≤0.002): 759±385 vs. 1188±423 μm(2)/sec minimum ADC value, 941±440 vs. 1310±440 μm(2)/sec average ADC value. The mean sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of both readers were 96%, 72%, and 85% on standard MRI alone and 97%, 90%, and 94% on standard MRI with DWI. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of DWI to standard MRI improves the diagnostic accuracy for differentiation of malignant from benign soft tissue tumours at 3.0 T. KEY POINTS: DWI has added value for differentiating malignant from benign soft tissue tumours. Addition of DWI to standard MRI at 3.0 T improves the diagnostic accuracy. Measurements of both ADC min within solid portion and ADC av are helpful.
Authors: Jan L M A Gielen; Arthur M De Schepper; Filip Vanhoenacker; Paul M Parizel; Xiaoling L Wang; Raf Sciot; Joost Weyler Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2004-07-29 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Filippo Del Grande; Ty Subhawong; Kristy Weber; Michael Aro; Charles Mugera; Laura M Fayad Journal: Radiology Date: 2014-02-01 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Federico Bruno; Francesco Arrigoni; Silvia Mariani; Alessandra Splendiani; Ernesto Di Cesare; Carlo Masciocchi; Antonio Barile Journal: Radiol Med Date: 2019-04-04 Impact factor: 3.469
Authors: Lennart Well; Johannes Salamon; Michael G Kaul; Said Farschtschi; Jochen Herrmann; Karin I Geier; Christian Hagel; Maximilian Bockhorn; Peter Bannas; Gerhard Adam; Victor F Mautner; Thorsten Derlin Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2019-03-18 Impact factor: 12.300