Diagnostic performance of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) for differentiating endometrial carcinoma from benign lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yashar Moharamzad ◽  
Amir H. Davarpanah ◽  
Ali Yaghobi Joybari ◽  
Fatemeh Shahbazi ◽  
Leila Esmaeilian Toosi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Diffusion Coefficient ◽  
Apparent Diffusion Coefficient ◽  
Endometrial Carcinoma ◽  
Diagnostic Performance ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Benign Lesions ◽  
Apparent Diffusion

Diagnostic performance of whole-lesion apparent diffusion coefficient histogram analysis metrics for differentiating benign and malignant breast lesions: a systematic review and diagnostic meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 61 (9) ◽  
pp. 1165-1175
Author(s):  
Fan Xu ◽  
Ying-ying Liang ◽  
Yuan Guo ◽  
Zhi-ping Liang ◽  
Mei Wu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Diffusion Coefficient ◽  
Apparent Diffusion Coefficient ◽  
Diagnostic Performance ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Histogram Analysis ◽  
Breast Lesions ◽  
Adc Value ◽  
Apparent Diffusion ◽  
Malignant Breast ◽  
Meta Regression

Background Although whole-lesion apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) histogram has been increasingly used for breast lesions, it has not been routinely used in clinical practice as an emergent promising imaging tool. Purpose To evaluate the performance of whole-lesion ADC histogram analysis metrics for differentiating benign and malignant breast lesions. Material and Methods A systematic PubMed/EMBASE/Cochrane electronic database search was performed for original diagnostic studies from 1 January 1970 to 2 January 2019. Summary estimates of diagnostic accuracy were generated and meta-regression was performed to explore sources of heterogeneity according to study and magnetic resonance imaging characteristics. Results Five original articles involving 493 patients were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of whole-lesion ADC histogram analysis were 0.85 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.81–0.89) and 0.79 (95% CI = 0.72–0.84) for distinguishing benign and malignant breast lesions, respectively. The area under the curve (AUC) was 0.9178. No publication bias was detected ( P = 0.51). In subgroup analysis, the summary sensitivity and specificity of 50th percentile ADC value were 0.81 (95% CI = 0.71–0.88) and 0.86 (95% CI = 0.74–0.94), respectively. Meta-regression analysis indicated no covariates were sources of heterogeneity ( P > 0.05). Conclusion Whole-lesion ADC histogram analysis demonstrated good diagnostic performance for differentiating between benign and malignant breast lesions, with 50th percentile ADC value showing higher diagnostic accuracy than other histogram parameters. Given the limited number of studies included in the analysis, the findings from our meta-analysis will need further confirmation in future research.

Diagnostic accuracy of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) value in differentiating malignant from benign solid liver lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
pp. 20210059
Author(s):  
Farhad Nalaini ◽  
Fatemeh Shahbazi ◽  
Seyedeh Maryam Mousavinezhad ◽  
Ali Ansari ◽  
Mohammadgharib Salehi
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Diffusion Coefficient ◽  
Diagnostic Performance ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Liver Lesions ◽  
Apparent Diffusion ◽  
Adc Values ◽  
Malignant Lesions ◽  
Malignant Liver ◽  
Malignant Liver Lesions

Objectives: We undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis of the diagnostic performance of mean apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values derived by diffusion-weighted (DW)-MRI in the characterization of solid benign and malignant liver lesions, and to assess their value in discriminating these lesions in daily routine practice. Methods: A systematic review of PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science was conducted to retrieve studies that used ADC values for differentiating solid benign/dysplastic nodules and malignant liver lesions. A bivariate random-effects model with pooled sensitivity and specificity values with 95% CI (confidence interval) was used. This meta-analysis was performed on the per-lesion basis. Summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) plot and area under curve (AUC) were created. Results: A total of 14 original articles were retrieved. The combined (95% CI) sensitivity and specificity of mean ADC values for differentiating solid benign from malignant lesions were 78% (67 to 86%) and 74% (64 to 81%), respectively. The pooled (95% CI) positive and negative LRs were respectively 3 (2.3 to 3.8) and 0.3 (0.21 to 0.43). The DOR (95% CI) was 10 (7 to 15). The AUC (95% CI) of the SROC plot was 82% (78 to 85%). Reporting bias was negligible (P value of regression test = 0.36). Mean size of malignant lesions and breathing pattern of MRI were found to be sources of heterogeneity of pooled sensitivity. Conclusion: ADC measurement independently may not be an optimal diagnostic imaging method for differentiating solid malignant from solid benign hepatic lesions. The meta-analysis showed that ADC measurement had moderate diagnostic accuracy for characterizing solid liver lesions. Further prospective and comparative studies with pre-specified ADC thresholds could be performed to investigate the best MRI protocol and ADC threshold for characterizing solid liver lesions. Advances in knowledge: ADC measurement by DW-MRI does not have a good diagnostic performance to differentiate solid malignant from solid benign lesions. Therefore, we suggest not using ADC values in clinical practice to evaluate solid liver lesions.

scholarly journals Apparent diffusion coefficient for differentiating between benign and malignant hepatic focal lesions

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sherif Abugamra ◽  
Aya Yassin ◽  
Asmaa Saber Mostafa Abdel-Rehim ◽  
Dina Sayed Sheha
Keyword(s):  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Diffusion Coefficient ◽  
Apparent Diffusion Coefficient ◽  
Focal Lesion ◽  
Benign Lesions ◽  
Focal Lesions ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Apparent Diffusion ◽  
Malignant Lesions ◽  
The Mean

Abstract Background The aim of this study was to prospectively evaluate the role of diffusion weight MRI (DWI) in the characterization of hepatic focal lesions by using apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC). Thirty patients (18 women, 12 men; mean age 48.5 years) with hepatic focal lesions were included in this study. Patients underwent DW MR imaging with the SPLICE sequence. ADC of each focal lesion carcinoma was calculated from DW MR Images obtained with low and high b values. ADCs were compared among pathological types of focal lesions. Results Among the 30 patients included in the study, 46 focal lesions were detected. Twenty-four lesions were metastatic lesions from primary cancer, 7 lesions were hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), 9 lesions were hemangiomas, and 6 lesions were simple cysts. There was highly significant difference between the mean ADC of the malignant lesions (metastasis and HCC) and the mean ADC of benign lesions (hemangiomas and cysts). The ADC of malignant lesion was much less than that of benign lesion. The mean ADC of malignant lesions (n = 31) was 0.73 ± 0.19 × 10−3 mm2/s, and the mean ADC of benign lesions (n = 15) was 1.94 ± 0.68 × 10−3 mm2/s (p value < 0.001). There was no significant difference between the cysts and hemangiomas. There was no statistically significant difference between the metastases and hepatocellular carcinoma. Conclusion ADCs values were able to differentiate benign from malignant lesions. ADC should be considered in the work up of patients with hepatic focal lesions.

scholarly journals Apparent diffusion coefficient cannot discriminate metastatic and non-metastatic lymph nodes in rectal cancer: a meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexey Surov ◽  
Hans-Jonas Meyer ◽  
Maciej Pech ◽  
Maciej Powerski ◽  
Jasan Omari ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rectal Cancer ◽  
Diffusion Coefficient ◽  
Apparent Diffusion Coefficient ◽  
Lymph Nodes ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Adc Value ◽  
Metastatic Lymph Nodes ◽  
Metastatic Lymph ◽  
Apparent Diffusion ◽  
Adc Values

Abstract Background Our aim was to provide data regarding use of diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) for distinguishing metastatic and non-metastatic lymph nodes (LN) in rectal cancer. Methods MEDLINE library, EMBASE, and SCOPUS database were screened for associations between DWI and metastatic and non-metastatic LN in rectal cancer up to February 2021. Overall, 9 studies were included into the analysis. Number, mean value, and standard deviation of DWI parameters including apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values of metastatic and non-metastatic LN were extracted from the literature. The methodological quality of the studies was investigated according to the QUADAS-2 assessment. The meta-analysis was undertaken by using RevMan 5.3 software. DerSimonian, and Laird random-effects models with inverse-variance weights were used to account the heterogeneity between the studies. Mean DWI values including 95% confidence intervals were calculated for metastatic and non-metastatic LN. Results ADC values were reported for 1376 LN, 623 (45.3%) metastatic LN, and 754 (54.7%) non-metastatic LN. The calculated mean ADC value (× 10−3 mm2/s) of metastatic LN was 1.05, 95%CI (0.94, 1.15). The calculated mean ADC value of the non-metastatic LN was 1.17, 95%CI (1.01, 1.33). The calculated sensitivity and specificity were 0.81, 95%CI (0.74, 0.89) and 0.67, 95%CI (0.54, 0.79). Conclusion No reliable ADC threshold can be recommended for distinguishing of metastatic and non-metastatic LN in rectal cancer.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document