Literature DB >> 26231045

Diffusion-weighted MR imaging using FASE sequence for 3T MR system: Preliminary comparison of capability for N-stage assessment by means of diffusion-weighted MR imaging using EPI sequence, STIR FASE imaging and FDG PET/CT for non-small cell lung cancer patients.

Yoshiharu Ohno1, Hisanobu Koyama2, Takeshi Yoshikawa3, Daisuke Takenaka4, Yoshimori Kassai5, Masao Yui5, Sumiaki Matsumoto3, Kazuro Sugimura2.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To prospectively compare the diagnostic capability of diffusion-weighted MR imaging obtained with fast advantage spin-echo sequence (FASE-DWI) and echo planar imaging sequence (EPI-DWI), short inversion time inversion recovery fast advanced spin-echo (STIR FASE) imaging and FDG PET/CT for N-stage assessment of non-small cell carcinoma (NSCLC) patients.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: 95 consecutive operable NSCLC patients underwent STIR FASE imaging, FASE-DWI and EPI-DWI with a 3T system, integrated PET/CT, surgical treatment and pathological and follow-up examinations. Probability of lymph node metastasis was visually assessed using a 5-point visual scoring system. ROC analyses were used to compare diagnostic capability of all methods, while their diagnostic performance was also compared by means of McNemar's test on a per node basis. Finally, McNemar's test was also used for statistical comparison of accuracy of N-stage assessment.
RESULTS: Areas under the curve (Azs) for STIR FASE imaging (Az=0.95) and FASE-DWI (Az=0.92) were significantly larger than those for EPI-DWI (Az=0.78; p<0.0001 for STIR FSE imaging and FASE-DWI) and PET/CT (Az=0.85; p=0.0001 for STIR FSE imaging, p=0.03 for FASE-DWI) on a per node basis analysis. Accuracy of N-stage assessment using STIR FASE imaging (84.2% [80/95]) and FASE-DWI (83.2% [79/95]) was significantly higher than that using EPI-DWI (76.8% [73/95]; p=0.02 for STIR FASE imaging, p=0.03 for FASE-DWI) and PET/CT (73.7% [70/95]; p=0.002 for STIR FSE imaging, p=0.004 for FASE-DWI).
CONCLUSION: Qualitative N-stage assessments of NSCLC patients obtained with FASE-DWI as well as STIR FASE imaging are more sensitive and/or accurate than those obtained with EPI-DWI and FDG PET/CT.
Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Diffusion; Lung; Lung cancer; MR imaging; PET/CT; Staging

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26231045     DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2015.07.019

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Radiol        ISSN: 0720-048X            Impact factor:   3.528


  4 in total

Review 1.  Diffusion weighted imaging: Technique and applications.

Authors:  Vinit Baliyan; Chandan J Das; Raju Sharma; Arun Kumar Gupta
Journal:  World J Radiol       Date:  2016-09-28

2.  Evaluation of Thin-slice Coronal Single-shot Turbo Spin-echo Diffusion-weighted Imaging of the Hand: A Comparison with Conventional Echo-planar Diffusion-weighted Imaging.

Authors:  Masaki Ogawa; Motoo Nakagawa; Nobuyuki Arai; Hirohito Kan; Shota Ohba; Shunsuke Shibata; Hiroyuki Maki; Yuta Shibamoto
Journal:  Magn Reson Med Sci       Date:  2019-10-24       Impact factor: 2.471

Review 3.  State-of-the-art MR Imaging for Thoracic Diseases.

Authors:  Yumi Tanaka; Yoshiharu Ohno; Satomu Hanamatsu; Yuki Obama; Takahiro Ueda; Hirotaka Ikeda; Akiyoshi Iwase; Takashi Fukuba; Hidekazu Hattori; Kazuhiro Murayama; Takeshi Yoshikawa; Daisuke Takenaka; Hisanobu Koyama; Hiroshi Toyama
Journal:  Magn Reson Med Sci       Date:  2021-04-29       Impact factor: 2.760

4.  Magnetic resonance (MR) imaging for tumor staging and definition of tumor volumes on radiation treatment planning in nonsmall cell lung cancer: A prospective radiographic cohort study of single center clinical outcome.

Authors:  Dan Zhao; Qiaoqiao Hu; Liping Qi; Juan Wang; Hao Wu; Guangying Zhu; Huiming Yu
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2017-02       Impact factor: 1.817

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.