| Literature DB >> 31367161 |
Hao Yu1, Ya-Qi Shen1, Fang-Qin Tan1, Zi-Ling Zhou1, Zhen Li1, Dao-Yu Hu2, John N Morelli3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Magnetic resonance enterography (MRE) is increasingly attractive as a noninvasive and radiation-free tool for assessing Crohn's disease (CD). Diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) is recommended as an optional MRE sequence for CD by the European Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology, and has shown a superb potential as a quantitative modality for bowel inflammation evaluation. However, the measurement reproducibility of quantitative DWI analysis in MRE has not been ascertained so far. To facilitate the application of quantitative diffusion-weighted MRE in the clinical routine, systematic investigations of the intra and interobserver reproducibility of DWI quantitative parameters should be performed. AIM: To evaluate the intra and interobserver reproducibility of quantitative analysis for diffusion-weighted MRE (DW-MRE) in ileal CD.Entities:
Keywords: Crohn's disease; Diffusion-weighted imaging; Ileum; Magnetic resonance imaging; Reproducibility
Year: 2019 PMID: 31367161 PMCID: PMC6658399 DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v25.i27.3619
Source DB: PubMed Journal: World J Gastroenterol ISSN: 1007-9327 Impact factor: 5.742
Figure 1Flow chart illustrating study design. DWI: Diffusion weighted imaging; CD: Crohn’s disease.
Figure 2A 48-year-old man with Crohn’s disease involving the terminal ileum. A: Axial diffusion-weighted imaging with b = 800 s/mm2 demonstrated high signal intensity of the terminal ileum (arrow). B: The terminal ileum was hypointense (arrow) on the corresponding apparent diffusion coefficient map. C: Ileocolonoscopy showed mucosal ulcers. D: Histopathology demonstrated neutrophil infiltration.
Clinical characteristics of included subjects
| CD patients ( | 21 |
| Age (yr) (mean ± SD) | 43.4 ± 16.1 |
| Gender (males: Females) | 11:10 |
| CRP (mg/dL) [median (range)] | 21.0 (0.9-94.0) |
| ESR (mm/h) [median (range)] | 19 (7-51) |
| Days between MRE and endoscopy median [median (range)] | 4 (0-7) |
| Endoscopic findings of terminal ileum ( | |
| Overt ulcers | 12 |
| Aphthoid lesions | 5 |
| Erythema or edema conditions | 4 |
| Control group ( | 23 |
| Age (yr) (mean ± SD) | 46.3 ± 15.4 |
| Gender (males:females) | 11:12 |
| Days between MRE and endoscopy [median (range)] | 3 (1-7) |
| Total ( | 44 |
| Age (yr) (mean ± SD) | 44.9 ± 15.7 |
| Gender (males:females) | 22:22 |
| Days between MRE and endoscopy [median (range)] | 4 (0-7) |
CD: Crohn’s disease; SD: Standard deviation; CRP: C-reactive protein; ESR: Erythrocyte sedimentation rate; MRE: Magnetic resonance enterography.
Intraobserver agreement and variability of apparent diffusion coefficient and signal ratio measurements between the two readers over two sessions
| ADC | 1.50 ± 0.40 | 1.54 ± 0.45 | 0.201 | 1.52 ± 0.45 | 1.56 ± 0.47 | 0.125 | 2.55 ± 0.53 | 2.53 ± 0.53 | 0.772 | 2.57 ± 0.50 | 2.64 ± 0.57 | 0.450 |
| ICC | 0.952 | 0.977 | 0.736 | 0.711 | ||||||||
| CoV | 6.28 | 4.71 | 10.47 | 10.64 | ||||||||
| Bias (%) | 1.77 | 1.89 | -1.07 | -1.71 | ||||||||
| LoA (%) | -14.10 to 17.65 | -10.65 to 14.42 | -30.75 to 28.62 | -28.30 to 24.86 | ||||||||
| SR | 4.17 ± 1.43 | 4.20 ± 1.36 | 0.505 | 4.21 ± 1.34 | 4.23 ± 1.42 | 0.794 | 1.45 ± 0.54 | 1.44 ± 0.53 | 0.697 | 1.44 ± 0.52 | 1.45 ± 0.56 | 0.704 |
| ICC | 0.989 | 0.979 | 0.974 | 0.944 | ||||||||
| CoV | 3.51 | 4.64 | 5.93 | 8.69 | ||||||||
| Bias (%) | 1.39 | -0.07 | -0.58 | 0.45 | ||||||||
| LoA (%) | -9.22 to 12.01 | -13.81 to 13.67 | -19.16 to 17.99 | -23.99 to 24.88 | ||||||||
Apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) and signal ratio parameters are expressed as the mean ± standard deviation, ADC units: ×10-3 mm2/s. ADC: Apparent diffusion coefficient; SR: Signal ratio; CD: Crohn’s disease; ICC: Intraclass correlation coefficient; CoV: Coefficients of variation; LoA: Bland-Altman analysis with 95% limits of agreement.
Interobserver agreement and variability of apparent diffusion coefficient and signal ratio measurements between the two readers over two sessions
| ADC | 1.50 ± 0.40 | 1.52 ± 0.45 | 0.402 | 1.54 ± 0.45 | 1.56 ± 0.47 | 0.379 | 2.55 ± 0.53 | 2.57 ± 0.50 | 0.815 | 2.53 ± 0.53 | 2.64 ± 0.57 | 0.208 | |||
| ICC | 0.969 | 0.984 | 0.641 | 0.736 | |||||||||||
| CoV | 4.71 | 3.73 | 11.43 | 11.07 | |||||||||||
| Bias (%) | -0.72 | -0.82 | -1.20 | -3.98 | |||||||||||
| LoA (%) | -14.29 to 12.85 | -12.09 to 10.44 | -32.03 to 29.62 | -33.93 to 25.96 | |||||||||||
| SR | 4.17 ± 1.43 | 4.21 ± 1.34 | 0.473 | 4.20 ± 1.36 | 4.23 ± 1.42 | 0.569 | 1.45 ± 0.54 | 1.44 ± 0.52 | 0.760 | 1.44 ± 0.53 | 1.45 ± 0.56 | 0.618 | |||
| ICC | 0.981 | 0.989 | 0.950 | 0.971 | |||||||||||
| CoV | 4.53 | 3.72 | 8.12 | 6.27 | |||||||||||
| Bias (%) | -1.85 | -0.39 | 0.43 | -0.59 | |||||||||||
| LoA (%) | -17.30 to 13.60 | -12.38 to 11.61 | -22.17 to 23.04 | -19.47 to 18.29 | |||||||||||
Apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) and signal ratio parameters are expressed as the mean ± standard deviation, ADC units: ×10-3 mm2/s. ADC: Apparent diffusion coefficient; SR: Signal ratio; CD: Crohn’s disease; ICC: Intraclass correlation coefficient; CoV: Coefficients of variation; LoA: Bland-Altman analysis with 95% limits of agreement.
Figure 3Bland-Altman plots of intraobserver agreement between 2 two sessions of two readers. Bland-Altman 95% limits of agreement with diffusion weighted imaging parameters including apparent diffusion coefficient and signal ratio from the Crohn’s disease group and normal group. The solid line represents the mean relative difference as a percentage and the dashed lines represent the upper and lower 95% limits of agreement. ADC: Apparent diffusion coefficient; SR: Signal ratio; CD: Crohn’s disease; SD: Standard deviation; R1S1: First session of reader 1; R1S2: Second session of reader 1; R1S2: First session of reader 2; R2S2: Second session of reader 2.
Figure 4Bland-Altman plots of interobserver agreement between two readers at two sessions. Bland-Altman 95% limits of agreement with Crohn’s disease parameters including apparent diffusion coefficient and signal ratio from the Crohn’s disease group and normal group. The solid line represents the mean relative difference as a percentage and the dashed lines represent the upper and lower 95% limits of agreement. ADC: Apparent diffusion coefficient; SR: Signal ratio; CD: Crohn’s disease; SD: Standard deviation; R1S1: First session of reader 1; R1S2: Second session of reader 1; R1S2: First session of reader 2; R2S2: Second session of reader 2.
Figure 5Scatterplots between apparent diffusion coefficient and signal ratio of reader 1 and reader 2. Reader 1: r = -0.438, P = 0.047; Reader 2: r = -0.485, P = 0.026; R1: reader 1; R2: reader 2. ADC: Apparent diffusion coefficient; SR: Signal ratio; R1: Reader 1; R2: Reader 2.
Diagnostic performance of apparent diffusion coefficient and signal ratio for differentiating inflammatory lesions from normal terminal ileum
| First reader | |||||||
| ADC value | 1.52 ± 0.42 | 2.54 ± 0.49 | < 0.001 | 1.80 | 0.923 | 85.7 | 95.7 |
| SR value | 4.19 ± 1.39 | 1.44 ± 0.53 | < 0.001 | 2.24 | 0.981 | 90.5 | 95.7 |
| Second reader | |||||||
| ADC value | 1.54 ± 0.46 | 2.61 ± 0.48 | < 0.001 | 1.81 | 0.929 | 85.7 | 95.7 |
| SR value | 4.22 ± 1.37 | 1.45 ± 0.53 | < 0.001 | 2.07 | 0.988 | 95.2 | 95.7 |
P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) and signal ratio parameters are expressed as the mean ± SD, ADC units: ×10-3 mm2/s. ADC: Apparent diffusion coefficient; SR: Signal ratio; CD: Crohn’s disease; AUROC: Areas under receiver operating characteristic curve.
Figure 6Receiver operating characteristic curve for quantitative apparent diffusion coefficient and signal ratio of the two readers. ADC: Apparent diffusion coefficient; SR: Signal ratio; R1: Reader 1; R2: Reader 2.