BACKGROUND: Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (DWI) makes it possible to detect malignant tumors based on the diffusion of water molecules. It is uncertain whether DWI is more useful than positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PET-CT) for distinguishing benign from malignant mediastinal tumors and mass lesions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixteen malignant mediastinal tumors (thymomas 7, thymic cancers 3, malignant lymphomas 3, malignant germ cell tumors 2, and thymic carcinoid 1) and 12 benign mediastinal tumors or mass lesions were assessed in this study. DWI and PET-CT were performed before biopsy or surgery. RESULTS: The apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) value (1.51±0.46x10(-3) mm2/sec) of malignant mediastinal tumors was significantly lower than that (2.96±0.86x10(-3) mm2/sec) of benign mediastinal tumors and mass lesions (P<0.0001). Maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax) (11.30±11.22) of malignant mediastinal tumors was significantly higher than that (2.53±3.92) of benign mediastinal tumors and mass lesions (P=0.0159). Using the optimal cutoff value (OCV) 2.21x10(-3) mm2/sec for ADC and 2.93 for SUVmax, the sensitivity (100%) by DWI was not significantly higher than that (93.8%) by PET-CT for malignant mediastinal tumors. The specificity (83.3%) by DWI was not significantly higher than that (66.7%) for benign mediastinal tumors and mass lesions. The accuracy (92.9%) by DWI was not significantly higher than that (82.1%) by PET-CT for mediastinal tumors and mass lesions. CONCLUSIONS: There was no significant difference between diagnostic capability of DWI and that of PET-CT for distinguishing mediastinal tumors and mass lesions. DWI is useful in distinguishing benign from malignant mediastinal tumors and mass lesions.
BACKGROUND: Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (DWI) makes it possible to detect malignant tumors based on the diffusion of water molecules. It is uncertain whether DWI is more useful than positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PET-CT) for distinguishing benign from malignant mediastinal tumors and mass lesions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixteen malignant mediastinal tumors (thymomas 7, thymic cancers 3, malignant lymphomas 3, malignant germ cell tumors 2, and thymic carcinoid 1) and 12 benign mediastinal tumors or mass lesions were assessed in this study. DWI and PET-CT were performed before biopsy or surgery. RESULTS: The apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) value (1.51±0.46x10(-3) mm2/sec) of malignant mediastinal tumors was significantly lower than that (2.96±0.86x10(-3) mm2/sec) of benign mediastinal tumors and mass lesions (P<0.0001). Maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax) (11.30±11.22) of malignant mediastinal tumors was significantly higher than that (2.53±3.92) of benign mediastinal tumors and mass lesions (P=0.0159). Using the optimal cutoff value (OCV) 2.21x10(-3) mm2/sec for ADC and 2.93 for SUVmax, the sensitivity (100%) by DWI was not significantly higher than that (93.8%) by PET-CT for malignant mediastinal tumors. The specificity (83.3%) by DWI was not significantly higher than that (66.7%) for benign mediastinal tumors and mass lesions. The accuracy (92.9%) by DWI was not significantly higher than that (82.1%) by PET-CT for mediastinal tumors and mass lesions. CONCLUSIONS: There was no significant difference between diagnostic capability of DWI and that of PET-CT for distinguishing mediastinal tumors and mass lesions. DWI is useful in distinguishing benign from malignant mediastinal tumors and mass lesions.