Naoko Mori1,2, Keiko Tsuchiya3, Deepa Sheth4, Shunji Mugikura5, Kei Takase5, Ulrich Katscher6, Hiroyuki Abe4. 1. Department of Radiology, The University of Chicago, 5841 S Maryland Ave, MC 2026, Chicago, IL, 60637, USA. naokomori7127@gmail.com. 2. Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine, Seiryo 1-1, Sendai, 980-8574, Japan. naokomori7127@gmail.com. 3. Department of Radiology, Shiga University of Medical Science, Setatsukinowa-cho, Otsu, Shiga, Japan. 4. Department of Radiology, The University of Chicago, 5841 S Maryland Ave, MC 2026, Chicago, IL, 60637, USA. 5. Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine, Seiryo 1-1, Sendai, 980-8574, Japan. 6. Philips Technologie GmbH, Research Laboratories, Roentgenstraße 24-26, 22335, Hamburg, Germany.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the diagnostic utility of electric properties tomography (EPT) in differentiating benign from malignant breast lesions in comparison with dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI). METHODS: In this institutional review board-approved retrospective study, 116 consecutive patients with 141 breast lesions (50 benign and 91 malignant) underwent 3-T MRI, including 3D turbo-spin echo (TSE) sequence and standard DCE-MRI scans between January 2014 and January 2017. The lesions were segmented semi-automatically using subtraction DCE-MR images, and they were registered to the phase images from 3D TSE. The mean conductivity of the lesion was obtained from phase-based reconstruction of lesions. From the DCE-MRI, initial enhancement rate (IER) and signal enhancement ratio (SER) were calculated from signal intensity (SI) as follows: IER = (SIearly - SIpre)/SIpre, SER = (SIearly - SIpre)/(SIdelayed - SIpre). The parameters from EPT and the DCE-MRI were compared between benign and malignant lesions. RESULTS: There was significant difference in mean conductivity (0.14 ± 1.77 vs 1.14 ± 1.36 S/m, p < 0.0001) and SER (0.77 ± 0.28 vs 1.04 ± 0.25, p < 0.0001) between benign and malignant lesions, but not in IER (p = 0.06). Receiver operating curve (ROC) analysis revealed that the area under the curve (AUC) of the mean conductivity and SER was 0.71 and 0.80, respectively, without significant difference (p = 0.15). CONCLUSIONS: The mean conductivity of EPT was significantly different between benign and malignant breast lesions as well as kinetic parameter or SER from DCE-MRI. KEY POINTS: • The conductivity of malignant lesions was higher than that of benign lesions. • EPT helps differentiatie benign from malignant lesions. • Diagnostic ability of EPT was not significantly different from that of DCE-MRI.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the diagnostic utility of electric properties tomography (EPT) in differentiating benign from malignant breast lesions in comparison with dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI). METHODS: In this institutional review board-approved retrospective study, 116 consecutive patients with 141 breast lesions (50 benign and 91 malignant) underwent 3-T MRI, including 3D turbo-spin echo (TSE) sequence and standard DCE-MRI scans between January 2014 and January 2017. The lesions were segmented semi-automatically using subtraction DCE-MR images, and they were registered to the phase images from 3D TSE. The mean conductivity of the lesion was obtained from phase-based reconstruction of lesions. From the DCE-MRI, initial enhancement rate (IER) and signal enhancement ratio (SER) were calculated from signal intensity (SI) as follows: IER = (SIearly - SIpre)/SIpre, SER = (SIearly - SIpre)/(SIdelayed - SIpre). The parameters from EPT and the DCE-MRI were compared between benign and malignant lesions. RESULTS: There was significant difference in mean conductivity (0.14 ± 1.77 vs 1.14 ± 1.36 S/m, p < 0.0001) and SER (0.77 ± 0.28 vs 1.04 ± 0.25, p < 0.0001) between benign and malignant lesions, but not in IER (p = 0.06). Receiver operating curve (ROC) analysis revealed that the area under the curve (AUC) of the mean conductivity and SER was 0.71 and 0.80, respectively, without significant difference (p = 0.15). CONCLUSIONS: The mean conductivity of EPT was significantly different between benign and malignant breast lesions as well as kinetic parameter or SER from DCE-MRI. KEY POINTS: • The conductivity of malignant lesions was higher than that of benign lesions. • EPT helps differentiatie benign from malignant lesions. • Diagnostic ability of EPT was not significantly different from that of DCE-MRI.
Entities:
Keywords:
Breast cancer; Electric conductivity; Magnetic resonance imaging
Authors: Constance D Lehman; Jeffrey D Blume; Paul Weatherall; David Thickman; Nola Hylton; Ellen Warner; Etta Pisano; Stuart J Schnitt; Constantine Gatsonis; Mitchell Schnall; Gia A DeAngelis; Paul Stomper; Eric L Rosen; Michael O'Loughlin; Steven Harms; David A Bluemke Journal: Cancer Date: 2005-05-01 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Ronald Ouwerkerk; Karen B Bleich; Joseph S Gillen; Martin G Pomper; Paul A Bottomley Journal: Radiology Date: 2003-03-27 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Ronald Ouwerkerk; Michael A Jacobs; Katarzyna J Macura; Antonio C Wolff; Vered Stearns; Sarah D Mezban; Nagi F Khouri; David A Bluemke; Paul A Bottomley Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2007-01-27 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Mieke Kriege; Cecile T M Brekelmans; Carla Boetes; Peter E Besnard; Harmine M Zonderland; Inge Marie Obdeijn; Radu A Manoliu; Theo Kok; Hans Peterse; Madeleine M A Tilanus-Linthorst; Sara H Muller; Sybren Meijer; Jan C Oosterwijk; Louk V A M Beex; Rob A E M Tollenaar; Harry J de Koning; Emiel J T Rutgers; Jan G M Klijn Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2004-07-29 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Olgica Zaric; Katja Pinker; Stefan Zbyn; Bernhard Strasser; Simon Robinson; Lenka Minarikova; Stephan Gruber; Alex Farr; Christian Singer; Thomas H Helbich; Siegfried Trattnig; Wolfgang Bogner Journal: Radiology Date: 2016-01-27 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Soraya Gavazzi; Yulia Shcherbakova; Lambertus W Bartels; Lukas J A Stalpers; Jan J W Lagendijk; Hans Crezee; Cornelis A T van den Berg; Astrid L H M W van Lier Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2019-09-04 Impact factor: 4.668