Jianxiao Liang1, Hailian Lv2, Qingwei Liu3, Hongfu Li4, Jiangquan Wang5, Engang Cui4. 1. Shandong University Jinan 250012, P. R. China ; Department of Radiology, Dongying People's Hospital Dongying 257091, P. R. China. 2. Department of MRI Division, Shengli Oilfield Central Hospital Dongying 257034, P. R. China. 3. Department of Radiology, Shandong Provincial Hospital Jinan 250014, P. R. China. 4. Department of Radiology, Dongying People's Hospital Dongying 257091, P. R. China. 5. Department of Medical Services, Dongying People's Hospital Dongying 257091, P. R. China.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The study evaluated the applicability of diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (DW-MRI) and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values in the diagnosis and staging of gastric carcinoma (GC). METHODS: From December, 2013 to December, 2014, 35 GC patients were selected from the Department of Oncology. Carcinomatous gastric tissues were collected as the case group, and normal gastric tissues were collected as the control group. The DW-MRI examination was performed on a 3.0-T GE Signa Excite MRI scanner. The ADC values of carcinomatous and normal gastric tissues were measured. A statistical meta-analysis was further performed. RESULTS: DW-MRI identified 75.0% (3/4) patients with T1, 75.0% (6/8) patients with T2, 86.4% (19/22) patients with T3, and 100.0% (1/1) patient with T4, showing an accuracy for T staging of 82.9% (29/35); identified 92.9% (13/14) patients of N0, 58.3% (7/12) patents of N1, 62.5% (5/8) patents of N2, and 100.0% (1/1) patients of N3, showing an accuracy for N staging of 74.3% (26/35). The average ADC value in the case group was apparently lower than the control group (P < 0.001); in the poorly differentiated group was lower than the moderately and well differentiated groups (F = 111.1, P < 0.001). Pairwise comparison of the average ADC value between the poorly, moderately and well differentiated groups showed statistical significance (all P < 0.05). Meta-analysis further confirmed a higher average ADC value in the case group than the control group (SMD = -4.136, 95% CI = -5.344~-2.928, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: DW-MRI is proved to be an attractive, noninvasive, quantitative and useful technique in the diagnosis and staging of GC.
OBJECTIVE: The study evaluated the applicability of diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (DW-MRI) and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values in the diagnosis and staging of gastric carcinoma (GC). METHODS: From December, 2013 to December, 2014, 35 GC patients were selected from the Department of Oncology. Carcinomatous gastric tissues were collected as the case group, and normal gastric tissues were collected as the control group. The DW-MRI examination was performed on a 3.0-T GE Signa Excite MRI scanner. The ADC values of carcinomatous and normal gastric tissues were measured. A statistical meta-analysis was further performed. RESULTS: DW-MRI identified 75.0% (3/4) patients with T1, 75.0% (6/8) patients with T2, 86.4% (19/22) patients with T3, and 100.0% (1/1) patient with T4, showing an accuracy for T staging of 82.9% (29/35); identified 92.9% (13/14) patients of N0, 58.3% (7/12) patents of N1, 62.5% (5/8) patents of N2, and 100.0% (1/1) patients of N3, showing an accuracy for N staging of 74.3% (26/35). The average ADC value in the case group was apparently lower than the control group (P < 0.001); in the poorly differentiated group was lower than the moderately and well differentiated groups (F = 111.1, P < 0.001). Pairwise comparison of the average ADC value between the poorly, moderately and well differentiated groups showed statistical significance (all P < 0.05). Meta-analysis further confirmed a higher average ADC value in the case group than the control group (SMD = -4.136, 95% CI = -5.344~-2.928, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: DW-MRI is proved to be an attractive, noninvasive, quantitative and useful technique in the diagnosis and staging of GC.
Entities:
Keywords:
Gastric carcinoma; N staging; T staging; apparent diffusion coefficient; degree of differentiation; diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging; meta-analysis
Authors: Thomas C Kwee; Taro Takahara; Reiji Ochiai; Kazuhiro Katahira; Marc Van Cauteren; Yutaka Imai; Rutger A J Nievelstein; Peter R Luijten Journal: Eur J Radiol Date: 2009-04-28 Impact factor: 3.528
Authors: Jin Cheng; Yi Wang; Jie Deng; Robert J McCarthy; Gongwei Wang; He Wang; Yingjiang Ye Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2012-11-21 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: R Caivano; P Rabasco; A Lotumolo; F D' Antuono; A Zandolino; A Villonio; L Macarini; G Guglielmi; M Salvatore; A Cammarota Journal: Cancer Invest Date: 2014-03-21 Impact factor: 2.176
Authors: Alicia S Borggreve; Lucas Goense; Hylke J F Brenkman; Stella Mook; Gert J Meijer; Frank J Wessels; Marcel Verheij; Edwin P M Jansen; Richard van Hillegersberg; Peter S N van Rossum; Jelle P Ruurda Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2019-03-05 Impact factor: 3.039
Authors: Francisco R Maldonado; Juan P Princich; Lucia Micheletti; María S Toronchik; José I Erripa; Carlos Rugilo Journal: Pediatr Radiol Date: 2020-09-08