Literature DB >> 30140618

Low-to-high b value DWI ratio approaches in multiparametric MRI of the prostate: feasibility, optimal combination of b values, and comparison with ADC maps for the visual presentation of prostate cancer.

Yin Xi1, Alexander Liu2, Franklin Olumba2, Parker Lawson2, Daniel N Costa1,3, Qing Yuan1, Gaurav Khatri1, Takeshi Yokoo1,3, Ivan Pedrosa1,3,4, Robert E Lenkinski1,3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) is considered by experts as one of the key elements in multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) employed in oncological studies outside the brain. A low-to-high b value ratio DWI has been proposed as an approach to decrease acquisition time and simplify the analysis of DWI data without the need to use a mathematical model.
METHODS: Forty-three men with biopsy-proven prostate cancer (PCa) who underwent mpMRI of the prostate were included. Apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) maps were created in the MRI scanner using a mono-exponential algorithm [b value (× number of averages) =0 (×1), 10 (×1), 25 (×1), 50 (×1), 100 (×1), 250 (×1), 450 (×1), 1,000 (×2), 1,500 (×3), and 2,000 (×5) s/mm2]. DWI ratio images were calculated with three previously estimated optimal b value combinations: (I) b=100 and b=1,000 s/mm2 (R1); (II) b=100 and b=1,500 s/mm2 (R2); and (III) b=100 and b=2,000 s/mm2 (R3). For quantitative analysis, contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) between normal and cancerous tissue was compared between the ADC maps and the DWI ratio images in terms of noninferiority. For qualitative analysis, two radiologists read all images in a randomized order without knowing whether the presented image was an ADC map or a DWI ratio image. All images were scored in terms of artifacts, cancer conspicuity and overall image quality with a 5-point scale. Agreement between the readers was assessed by weighted kappa statistics. Agreement was considered as poor when kappa <0.4, fair to good when kappa >0.4 and <0.75 and excellent when kappa >0.75. Mean scores were compared between ADC and each of the DWI ratio images. Agreement between ADC maps and DWI ratio based synthetic ADC were assessed by intraclass correlation (ICC). Values less than 0.5, between 0.5 and 0.75, between 0.75 and 0.9, and greater than 0.90 were indicative of poor, moderate, good, and excellent reliability, respectively. Median difference between low and intermediate/high risk were tested.
RESULTS: Quantitative analysis shows DWI ratio images were not inferior to ADC maps quantitatively [P=0.0298 (ADC vs. R1), <0.0001 (ADC vs. R2) and <0.0001 (ADC vs. R3)]. Qualitatively, DWI ratio images were no more than 0.5 point on Likert scale lower than ADC in overall quality [P=0.0043 (ADC vs. R1), <0.0001 (ADC vs. R2), <0.0001 (ADC vs. R3)]. Reader agreement for the qualitative analysis was good to excellent (weighted kappa =0.4-0.7). Agreement between ADC maps and the synthetic ADC's were excellent. Significant difference between low and intermediate/high risk were found in all measurements on average (all P values <0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: We presented an analytical method for searching for the optimal combination of high and low b values for DWI ratio images in terms of minimizing CNR between cancer and surrounding benign tissues. Optimized DWI ratio images are comparable both quantitatively and qualitatively to ADC maps for the interpretation of DWI data in the context of prostate mpMRI.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Diffusion-weighted imaging ratio image (DWI ratio image); apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC); multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI); optimal b values; prostate cancer (PCa)

Year:  2018        PMID: 30140618      PMCID: PMC6081353          DOI: 10.21037/qims.2018.06.08

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Quant Imaging Med Surg        ISSN: 2223-4306


  43 in total

1.  Quantitative evaluation of computed high B value diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate.

Authors:  Marnix C Maas; Jurgen J Fütterer; Tom W J Scheenen
Journal:  Invest Radiol       Date:  2013-11       Impact factor: 6.016

2.  Diagnostic accuracy of ultra-high-b-value 3.0-T diffusion-weighted MR imaging for detection of prostate cancer.

Authors:  Yoshimitsu Ohgiya; Jumpei Suyama; Noritaka Seino; Takashi Hashizume; Masaaki Kawahara; Syouei Sai; Makoto Saiki; Jiro Munechika; Masanori Hirose; Takehiko Gokan
Journal:  Clin Imaging       Date:  2012-06-08       Impact factor: 1.605

3.  Clinical utility of apparent diffusion coefficient values obtained using high b-value when diagnosing prostate cancer using 3 tesla MRI: comparison between ultra-high b-value (2000 s/mm²) and standard high b-value (1000 s/mm²).

Authors:  Kazuhiro Kitajima; Satoru Takahashi; Yoshiko Ueno; Takeshi Yoshikawa; Yoshiharu Ohno; Makoto Obara; Hideaki Miyake; Masato Fujisawa; Kazuro Sugimura
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2012-02-27       Impact factor: 4.813

4.  Intravoxel incoherent motion (IVIM) diffusion imaging in prostate cancer - what does it add?

Authors:  Timur H Kuru; Matthias C Roethke; Bram Stieltjes; Klaus Maier-Hein; Heinz-Peter Schlemmer; Boris A Hadaschik; Michael Fenchel
Journal:  J Comput Assist Tomogr       Date:  2014 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 1.826

5.  Separation of diffusion and perfusion in intravoxel incoherent motion MR imaging.

Authors:  D Le Bihan; E Breton; D Lallemand; M L Aubin; J Vignaud; M Laval-Jeantet
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1988-08       Impact factor: 11.105

6.  High-b-value diffusion-weighted imaging at 3 T to detect prostate cancer: comparisons between b values of 1,000 and 2,000 s/mm2.

Authors:  Chan Kyo Kim; Byung Kwan Park; Bohyun Kim
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 3.959

7.  Optimal high b-value for diffusion weighted MRI in diagnosing high risk prostate cancers in the peripheral zone.

Authors:  Harsh K Agarwal; Francesca V Mertan; Sandeep Sankineni; Marcelino Bernardo; Julien Senegas; Jochen Keupp; Dagane Daar; Maria Merino; Bradford J Wood; Peter A Pinto; Peter L Choyke; Baris Turkbey
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2016-07-07       Impact factor: 4.813

8.  Prostate cancer: relationships between postbiopsy hemorrhage and tumor detectability at MR diagnosis.

Authors:  Tsutomu Tamada; Teruki Sone; Yoshimasa Jo; Akira Yamamoto; Takenori Yamashita; Naoto Egashira; Shigeki Imai; Masao Fukunaga
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2008-06-06       Impact factor: 11.105

9.  Gleason score and lethal prostate cancer: does 3 + 4 = 4 + 3?

Authors:  Jennifer R Stark; Sven Perner; Meir J Stampfer; Jennifer A Sinnott; Stephen Finn; Anna S Eisenstein; Jing Ma; Michelangelo Fiorentino; Tobias Kurth; Massimo Loda; Edward L Giovannucci; Mark A Rubin; Lorelei A Mucci
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2009-05-11       Impact factor: 44.544

Review 10.  Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Diagnosis of Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  M A Haider; X Yao; A Loblaw; A Finelli
Journal:  Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol)       Date:  2016-05-30       Impact factor: 4.126

View more
  4 in total

1.  The application of a targeted periprostatic nerve block in transperineal template-guided prostate biopsies.

Authors:  Xue-Fei Ding; Yang Luan; Fei Wang; Yao-Zong Xu; Cheng-Hao Guo; Liang-Yong Zhu
Journal:  Quant Imaging Med Surg       Date:  2020-11

2.  Detection of High-Grade Prostate Cancer With a Super High B-value (4000 s/mm2) in Diffusion-Weighted Imaging Sequences by Magnetic Resonance Imaging.

Authors:  Maria Jose Acosta-Falomir; Juan Carlos Angulo-Lozano; Luisa Fernanda Sanchez-Musi; Danny Soria Céspedes; Yeni Fernández de Lara Barrera
Journal:  Cureus       Date:  2022-03-03

3.  Can introvoxel incoherent motion MRI be used to differentiate patients with placenta accreta spectrum disorders?

Authors:  Tao Lu; Hong Pu; Kui-de Li; Jie Mei; Meng-Wei Huang; Shao-Yu Wang
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2019-12-30       Impact factor: 3.007

Review 4.  Prostate MRI quality: a critical review of the last 5 years and the role of the PI-QUAL score.

Authors:  Francesco Giganti; Veeru Kasivisvanathan; Alex Kirkham; Shonit Punwani; Mark Emberton; Caroline M Moore; Clare Allen
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2021-07-08       Impact factor: 3.039

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.