Diffusion MRI: apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values in the normal brain and a classification of brain disorders based on ADC values

2001 ◽  
Vol 25 (4) ◽  
pp. 299-326 ◽  
Author(s):  
R.N. Sener
Keyword(s):  
Diffusion Coefficient ◽  
Apparent Diffusion Coefficient ◽  
Diffusion Mri ◽  
Normal Brain ◽  
Brain Disorders ◽  
Apparent Diffusion ◽  
Adc Values

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.

Diagnostic value of apparent diffusion coefficient in differentiating between high-grade gliomas and brain metastases

2017 ◽  
Vol 59 (5) ◽  
pp. 599-605 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ionut Caravan ◽  
Cristiana Augusta Ciortea ◽  
Alexandra Contis ◽  
Andrei Lebovici
Keyword(s):  
Diffusion Coefficient ◽  
Brain Metastases ◽  
Apparent Diffusion Coefficient ◽  
Curve Analysis ◽  
High Grade ◽  
Peritumoral Edema ◽  
Roc Curve Analysis ◽  
Apparent Diffusion ◽  
Adc Values ◽  
The Mean

Background High-grade gliomas (HGGs) and brain metastases (BMs) can display similar imaging characteristics on conventional MRI. In HGGs, the peritumoral edema may be infiltrated by the malignant cells, which was not observed in BMs. Purpose To determine whether the apparent diffusion coefficient values could differentiate HGGs from BMs. Material and Methods Fifty-seven patients underwent conventional magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) before treatment. The minimum and mean ADC in the enhancing tumor (ADCmin, ADCmean) and the minimum ADC in the peritumoral region (ADCedema) were measured from ADC maps. To determine whether there was a statistical difference between groups, ADC values were compared. A receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was used to determine the cutoff ADC value for distinguishing between HGGs and BMs. Results The mean ADCmin values in the intratumoral regions of HGGs were significantly higher than those in BMs. No differences were observed between groups regarding ADCmean values. The mean ADCmin values in the peritumoral edema of HGGs were significantly lower than those in BMs. According to ROC curve analysis, a cutoff value of 1.332 × 10−3 mm2/s for the ADCedema generated the best combination of sensitivity (95%) and specificity (84%) for distinguishing between HGGs and BMs. The same value showed a sensitivity of 95.6% and a specificity of 100% for distinguishing between GBMs and BMs. Conclusion ADC values from DWI were found to distinguish between HGGs and solitary BMs. The peritumoral ADC values are better than the intratumoral ADC values in predicting the tumor type.

The Potential Role of Peritumoral Apparent Diffusion Coefficient Evaluation in Differentiating Glioblastoma and Solitary Metastatic Lesions of the Brain

2021 ◽  
Vol 17 ◽  
Author(s):  
Murat Tepe ◽  
Suzan Saylisoy ◽  
Ugur Toprak ◽  
Ibrahim Inan
Keyword(s):  
Diffusion Coefficient ◽  
White Matter ◽  
Apparent Diffusion Coefficient ◽  
Sensitivity And Specificity ◽  
Brain Mri ◽  
Solitary Metastasis ◽  
Metastatic Lesions ◽  
Institutional Review ◽  
Apparent Diffusion ◽  
Adc Values

Objective: Differentiating glioblastoma (GBM) and solitary metastasis is not always possible using conventional magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) techniques. In conventional brain MRI, GBM and brain metastases are lesions with mostly similar imaging findings. In this study, we investigated whether apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) ratios, ADC gradients, and minimum ADC values in the peritumoral edema tissue can be used to discriminate between these two tumors. Methods: This retrospective study was approved by the local institutional review board with a waiver of written informed consent. Prior to surgical and medical treatment, conventional brain MRI and diffusion-weighted MRI (b = 0 and b = 1000) images were taken from 43 patients (12 GBM and 31 solitary metastasis cases). Quantitative ADC measurements were performed on the peritumoral tissue from the nearest segment to the tumor (ADC1), the middle segment (ADC2), and the most distant segment (ADC3). The ratios of these three values were determined proportionally to calculate the peritumoral ADC ratios. In addition, these three values were subtracted from each other to obtain the peritumoral ADC gradients. Lastly, the minimum peritumoral and tumoral ADC values, and the quantitative ADC values from the normal appearing ipsilateral white matter, contralateral white matter and ADC values from cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) were recorded. Results: For the differentiation of GBM and solitary metastasis, ADC3 / ADC1 was the most powerful parameter with a sensitivity of 91.7% and specificity of 87.1% at the cut-off value of 1.105 (p < 0.001), followed by ADC3 / ADC2 with a cut-off value of 1.025 (p = 0.001), sensitivity of 91.7%, and specificity of 74.2%. The cut-off, sensitivity and specificity of ADC2 / ADC1 were 1.055 (p = 0.002), 83.3%, and 67.7%, respectively. For ADC3 – ADC1, the cut-off value, sensitivity and specificity were calculated as 150 (p < 0.001), 91.7% and 83.9%, respectively. ADC3 – ADC2 had a cut-off value of 55 (p = 0.001), sensitivity of 91.7%, and specificity of 77.4 whereas ADC2 – ADC1 had a cut-off value of 75 (p = 0.003), sensitivity of 91.7%, and specificity of 61.3%. Among the remaining parameters, only the ADC3 value successfully differentiated between GBM and metastasis (GBM 1802.50 ± 189.74 vs. metastasis 1634.52 ± 212.65, p = 0.022). Conclusion: The integration of the evaluation of peritumoral ADC ratio and ADC gradient into conventional MR imaging may provide valuable information for differentiating GBM from solitary metastatic lesions.

Can the apparent diffusion coefficient differentiate the grade of endometrioid adenocarcinoma and the histological subtype of endometrial cancer?

2017 ◽  
Vol 59 (3) ◽  
pp. 363-370 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bin Yan ◽  
Tingting Zhao ◽  
Xiufen Liang ◽  
Chen Niu ◽  
Caixia Ding
Keyword(s):  
Diffusion Coefficient ◽  
Endometrial Cancer ◽  
Apparent Diffusion Coefficient ◽  
Low Grade ◽  
Endometrioid Adenocarcinoma ◽  
High Grade ◽  
Squamous Differentiation ◽  
Apparent Diffusion ◽  
Adc Values ◽  
Endometrial Cancers

Background Diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) provides useful information for the identification of benign and malignant uterine lesions. However, the use of the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) for histopathological grading of endometrial cancer is controversial. Purpose To explore the use of ADC values in differentiating the preoperative tumor grading of endometrioid adenocarcinomas and investigate the relationship between the ADC values of endometrial cancer and the histological tumor subtype. Material and Methods We retrospectively evaluated 98 patients with endometrial cancers, including both endometrioid adenocarcinomas (n = 80) and non-endometrioid adenocarcinomas (n = 18). All patients underwent DWI procedures and ADC values were calculated. The Kruskal–Wallis test and the independent samples Mann–Whitney U test were used to compare differences in the ADC values between different tumor grades and different histological subtypes. Results The mean ADC values (ADCmean) for high-grade endometrioid adenocarcinomas were significantly lower than the values for low-grade tumors (0.800 versus 0.962 × 10–3 mm2/s) ( P = 0.002). However, no significant differences in ADCmean and minimum ADC values (ADCmin) were found between tumor grades (G1, G2, and G3) of endometrial cancer. Compared with endometrioid adenocarcinomas, the adenocarcinoma with squamous differentiation showed lower ADC values (mean/minimum = 0.863/0.636 versus 0.962/0.689 × 10–3 mm2/s), but the differences were not significant ( Pmean = 0.074, Pmin = 0.441). Moreover, ADCmean for carcinosarcomas was significantly higher than the value for G3 non-carcinosarcoma endometrial cancers (1.047 versus 0.823 × 10–3 mm2/s) ( P = 0.001). Conclusion The ADCmean was useful for identifying high-grade and low-grade endometrioid adenocarcinomas. Additionally, squamous differentiation may decrease ADCmean and ADCmin of endometrioid adenocarcinoma, and carcinosarcomas showed relatively high ADCmean.

Influence of menstrual status and pathological type on the apparent diffusion coefficient in cervical cancer: a primary study

2020 ◽  
pp. 028418512092689
Author(s):  
Yue Dong ◽  
Rui Tong Dong ◽  
Xiao Miao Zhang ◽  
Qing Ling Song ◽  
Tao Yu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cervical Cancer ◽  
Diffusion Coefficient ◽  
Apparent Diffusion Coefficient ◽  
Primary Study ◽  
Adc Value ◽  
Cervical Cancers ◽  
Menstrual Status ◽  
Pathological Type ◽  
Apparent Diffusion ◽  
Adc Values

Background Apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) value is an important quantitative parameter in the research of cervical cancer, affected by some factors. Purpose To investigate the effect of pathological type and menstrual status on the ADC value of cervical cancer. Material and Methods A total of 352 individuals with pathologically confirmed cervical cancer between January 2015 to December 2017 were retrospectively enrolled in this study, including 317 cases with squamous cell carcinomas (SCC) and 35 cases with adenocarcinomas (AC); 177 patients were non-menopausal and 175 were menopausal. All patients underwent a routine 3.0-T magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scan and diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) examination using b-values of 0, 800, and 1000 s/mm2. Three parameters including mean ADC (ADCmean), maximum ADC (ADCmax), and minimum ADC (ADCmin) of cervical cancer lesions were measured and retrospectively analyzed. Independent samples t-test was used to compare the difference of ADC values in different menstrual status and pathological types. Results In all menopausal and non-menopausal patients, the ADCmean and ADCmin values of SCC were lower than those of AC ( P<0.05), the ADCmax of two pathological types showed no statistical difference ( P > 0.05). In menopausal patients, the ADCmean, ADCmax, and ADCmin values of SCC were not statistically different compared with those of AC ( P > 0.05). The ADCmean, ADCmax, and ADCmin values of different pathological types cervical cancers in non-menopausal patients were all higher than those in menopausal patients ( P<0.05). Conclusion The ADC values of the cervical cancers were different in different pathological types and were also affected by menstrual status.

scholarly journals Assessment of Apparent Diffusion Coefficient Values as Predictor of Aggressiveness in Peripheral Zone Prostate Cancer: Comparison with Gleason Score

2014 ◽  
Vol 2014 ◽  
pp. 1-7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shayan Sirat Maheen Anwar ◽  
Zahid Anwar Khan ◽  
Rana Shoaib Hamid ◽  
Fahd Haroon ◽  
Raza Sayani ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Diffusion Coefficient ◽  
Apparent Diffusion Coefficient ◽  
Gleason Score ◽  
Case Series ◽  
Adc Value ◽  
Apparent Diffusion Coefficient Values ◽  
Apparent Diffusion Coefficient Value ◽  
Apparent Diffusion ◽  
Adc Values

Purpose. To determine association between apparent diffusion coefficient value on diffusion-weighted imaging and Gleason score in patients with prostate cancer. Methods. This retrospective case series was conducted at Radiology Department of Aga Khan University between June 2009 and June 2011. 28 patients with biopsy-proven prostate cancer were included who underwent ultrasound guided sextant prostate biopsy and MRI. MRI images were analyzed on diagnostic console and regions of interest were drawn. Data were entered and analyzed on SPSS 20.0. ADC values were compared with Gleason score using one-way ANOVA test. Results. In 28 patients, 168 quadrants were biopsied and 106 quadrants were positive for malignancy. 89 lesions with proven malignancy showed diffusion restriction. The mean ADC value for disease with a Gleason score of 6 was 935 mm2/s (SD=248.4 mm2/s); Gleason score of 7 was 837 mm2/s (SD=208.5 mm2/s); Gleason score of 8 was 614 mm2/s (SD=108 mm2/s); and Gleason score of 9 was 571 mm2/s (SD=82 mm2/s). Inverse relationship was observed between Gleason score and mean ADC values. Conclusion. DWI and specifically quantitative ADC values may help differentiate between low-risk (Gleason score, 6), intermediate-risk (Gleason score, 7), and high-risk (Gleason score 8 and 9) prostate cancers, indirectly determining the aggressiveness of the disease.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document