| Literature DB >> 30127903 |
Zhenshan Shi1, Xiumei Li1, Ruixiong You1, Yueming Li1, Xianying Zheng1, Kamisha Ramen2, Vikash Sahadeo Loosa2, Dairong Cao1, Qunlin Chen1.
Abstract
The aim of the present study was to evaluate the diagnostic benefit of diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) in the detection of homogenous isoattenuating insulinoma on biphasic contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) preoperatively and to determine which magnetic resonance (MR) sequences exhibited the best diagnostic performance. A total of 44 consecutive patients who underwent biphasic contrast-enhanced CT and conventional MR imaging (MRI), including DWI on a 3T scanner, were identified retrospectively. Apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values of insulinomas and the surrounding pancreatic parenchyma were compared using a Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Receiver operating characteristic analysis was used to compare the diagnostic accuracy of four randomized image sets [T2-weighted image (WI), axial T1WI, DWI and T2WI + DWI] for each reader. Axial T1-weighted MRI exhibited the highest relative sensitivity for each reader; DWI alone exhibited the lowest relative sensitivity and the lower inter-reader agreement. There was no significant difference in lesion detection between T2WI and T2WI + DWI image sets for each reader. The ADC values of the insulinoma were significantly lower compared with those of the surrounding parenchyma. In conclusion, DWI does not benefit the detection of homogenous isoattenuating insulinoma. Axial T1WI is the optimal pulse sequence. Quantitative assessment of the tumor ADC values may be a useful tool to characterize identified pancreatic neoplasms.Entities:
Keywords: diffusion-weighted imaging; insulinoma; magnetic resonance imaging; multi-detector computed tomography; pancreas
Year: 2018 PMID: 30127903 PMCID: PMC6096136 DOI: 10.3892/ol.2018.9037
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Oncol Lett ISSN: 1792-1074 Impact factor: 2.967
Main magnetic resonance imaging parameters.
| Sequence | TR/TE, msec | FOV, mm (length/width) | Matrix | Slice thickness/spacing between slices | Pixel band width, KHz | Flip angle, ° | Echo train length |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Axial fat-suppressed T2-weighted TSE sequence (T2WI) | 2999/79 | 210/380 | 320×168 | 5/6 | 240 | 140 | 9 |
| Axial single-shot echo planar imaging (DWI) | 6900/73 | 350/350 | 128×128 | 3/6 | 2441 | 90 | 1 |
| Axial T1-weighted images | 670/14 | 400/280 | 384×188 | 3/6 | 279 | 70 | 1 |
TR, repetition time; TE, echo time; DWI, diffusion-weighted imaging; FOV, field of view; WI, weighted-image; TSE, turbo spin echo.
Figure 1.Figs. 1–4 depict the same patient with insulinoma. Arterial phase computed tomography representative image revealing a small, well-defined, iso-attenuating mass (arrows) on the anterior periphery of the pancreatic body in a 26-year-old woman.
Figure 2.Isointense lesion on a T2-weighted axial magnetic resonance image (arrows).
Figure 4.Lesion showing a relatively homogenous, slightly high signal instensity on diffusion-weighted imaging (arrows).
Friedman-analysis of variance by ranks for the diagnosis confidence level score.
| Groups | Junior reader | Senior reader |
|---|---|---|
| Axial-T1WI | 3.20 | 3.05 |
| T2WI | 2.41 | 2.41 |
| DWI | 1.64 | 1.82 |
| T2WI + DWI | 2.75 | 2.73 |
| P-value | P=0.0001 | P=0.0001 |
DWI, diffusion-weighted imaging; WI, weighted-image.
Inter-observer agreement in image interpretation.
| Groups | κ-value |
|---|---|
| Axial-T1WI | 0.742 |
| T2WI | 0.871 |
| DWI | 0.459 |
| T2WI + DWI | 0.532 |
DWI, diffusion-weighted imaging; WI, weighted-image.
Figure 5.Receiver operating characteristic curves for tumor detection in four magnetic resonance image datasets according to the junior reader. DWI, diffusion-weighted imaging; WI, weighted image.
Figure 6.Receiver operating characteristic curves for tumor detection in four magnetic resonance image datasets according to the senior reader. DWI, diffusion-weighted imaging; WI, weighted image.
Az values for ROC analysis and relative sensitivity of fat-suppressed T1WI, T2WI, T2WI + DWI and DWI for tumor detection.
| Reader | Az | 95% CI | Sensitivity, % (n/total n) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Junior | |||
| Axial-T1WI | 0.921±0.04 | 0.800–0.981 | 91 (20/22) |
| T2WI | 0.830±0.06 | 0.686–0.926 | 68 (15/22) |
| DWI | 0.815±0.07 | 0.669–0.916 | 73 (16/22) |
| T2WI + DWI | 0.514±0.09 | 0.359–0.668 | 32 (4/22) |
| Senior | |||
| Axial-T1WI | 0.958±0.03 | 0.850–0.995 | 95 (21/22) |
| T2WI | 0.820±0.07 | 0.675–0.920 | 77 (17/22) |
| DWI | 0.869±0.05 | 0.733–0.951 | 77 (17/22) |
| T2WI + DWI | 0.549±0.09 | 0.391–0.699 | 36 (8/22) |
ROC, receiver operating characteristic; Az, area under the ROC curve; DWI, diffusion-weighted imaging; WI, weighted-image; CI, confidence interval.
ADC values of insulinoma compared with ADC values of surrounding pancreatic tissue[a].
| Wilcoxon signed-rank test | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Insulinoma ADC values (n=22) | Surrounding parenchyma ADC values (n=22) | Z-value | P-value |
| Mean | 1.06 | 2.931 | 0.003 |
| SD | 0.58 | ||
| Median | 0.81 | ||
| Minimum | 0.68 | ||
| Maximum | 2.46 | ||
ADC values in insulinoma were lower (1.06±0.58) compared with those in the surrounding pancreatic parenchyma (1.23±0.24). Wilcoxon signed-rank test demonstrated this difference to be statistically significant (P=0.003). ADC, apparent diffusion coefficient; SD, standard deviation.
Figure 7.Receiver operating characteristic curves for isoattenuating and hyperattenuating detection with diffusion-weighted imaging alone according to the junior reader.
Figure 8.Receiver operating characteristic curves for isoattenuating and hyperattenuating detection with diffusion-weighted imaging alone according to the senior reader.