Literature DB >> 28038915

Preoperative grading of supratentorial gliomas using high or standard b-value diffusion-weighted MR imaging at 3T.

M M Cihangiroglu1, E Ozturk-Isik2, Z Firat3, O Kilickesmez4, A M Ulug5, U Ture6.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The goal of this study was to compare diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (DW-MRI) using high b-value (b=3000s/mm2) to DW-MRI using standard b-value (b=1000s/mm2) in the preoperative grading of supratentorial gliomas.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty-three patients with glioma had brain DW-MRI at 3T using two different b-values (b=1000s/mm2 and b=3000s/mm2). There were 35 men and 18 women with a mean age of 40.5±17.1 years (range: 18-79 years). Mean, minimum, maximum, and range of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values for solid tumor ROIs (ADCmean, ADCmin, ADCmax, and ADCdiff), and the normalized ADC (ADCratio) were calculated. A Kruskal-Wallis statistic with Bonferroni correction for multiple comparisons was applied to detect significant ADC parameter differences between tumor grades by including or excluding 19 patients with an oligodendroglioma. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis was conducted to define appropriate cutoff values for grading gliomas.
RESULTS: No differences in ADC derived parameters were found between grade II and grade III gliomas. Mean ADC values using standard b-value were 1.17±0.27×10-3mm2/s [range: 0.63-1.61], 1.05±0.22×10-3mm2/s [range: 0.73-1.33], and 0.86±0.23×10-3mm2/s [range: 0.52-1.46] for grades II, III and IV gliomas, respectively. Using high b-value, mean ADC values were 0.89±0.24×10-3mm2/s [range: 0.42-1.25], 0.82±0.20×10-3mm2/s [range: 0.56-1.10], and 0.59±0.17×10-3mm2/s [range: 0.40-1.01] for grades II, III and IV gliomas, respectively. ADCmean, ADCratio, ADCmax, and ADCmin were different between grade II and grade IV gliomas at both standard and high b-values. Differences in ADCmean, ADCmax, and ADCdiff were found between grade III and grade IV only using high b-value.
CONCLUSION: ADC parameters derived from DW-MRI using a high b-value allows a better differential diagnosis of gliomas, especially for differentiating grades III and IV, than those derived from DW-MRI using a standard b-value.
Copyright © 2016 Éditions françaises de radiologie. Published by Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Diffusion-weighted MR imaging; Glioma; High b-value; Normalized apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC); Tumor grading

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 28038915     DOI: 10.1016/j.diii.2016.11.005

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Diagn Interv Imaging        ISSN: 2211-5684            Impact factor:   4.026


  5 in total

1.  Apparent diffusion coefficient maps obtained from high b value diffusion-weighted imaging in the preoperative evaluation of gliomas at 3T: comparison with standard b value diffusion-weighted imaging.

Authors:  Qiang Zeng; Fei Dong; Feina Shi; Chenhan Ling; Biao Jiang; Jianmin Zhang
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2017-06-21       Impact factor: 5.315

2.  Efficiency of High and Standard b Value Diffusion-Weighted Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Grading of Gliomas.

Authors:  Mansour Al-Agha; Khaled Abushab; Khetam Quffa; Samy Al-Agha; Yasser Alajerami; Mohammed Tabash
Journal:  J Oncol       Date:  2020-09-14       Impact factor: 4.375

3.  Machine Learning Based on Diffusion Kurtosis Imaging Histogram Parameters for Glioma Grading.

Authors:  Liang Jiang; Leilei Zhou; Zhongping Ai; Chaoyong Xiao; Wen Liu; Wen Geng; Huiyou Chen; Zhenyu Xiong; Xindao Yin; Yu-Chen Chen
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2022-04-21       Impact factor: 4.964

4.  Grading Gliomas Capability: Comparison between Visual Assessment and Apparent Diffusion Coefficient (ADC) Value Measurement on Diffusion-Weighted Imaging (DWI).

Authors:  Warinthorn Phuttharak; Jureerat Thammaroj; Sakda Wara-Asawapati; Kobporn Panpeng
Journal:  Asian Pac J Cancer Prev       Date:  2020-02-01

5.  Diagnostic efficacy of apparent diffusion coefficient measurements in differentiation of malignant intra-axial brain tumors

Authors:  İlker Eyüboğlu; İsmet Miraç Çakir; Serdar Aslan; Ahmet Sari
Journal:  Turk J Med Sci       Date:  2021-02-26       Impact factor: 0.973

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.