scholarly journals Diagnostic performance of apparent diffusion coefficient values for the differentiation of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma from gastrointestinal adenocarcinoma liver metastases

2021 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
Temel Fatih Yilmaz ◽  
Mehmet Ali Gultekin ◽  
Hacı Mehmet Turk ◽  
Mehmet Besiroglu ◽  
Dilek Hacer Cesme ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Diffusion Coefficient ◽  
Apparent Diffusion Coefficient ◽  
Liver Metastases ◽  
Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma ◽  
Predictive Value ◽  
Gastrointestinal System ◽  
Apparent Diffusion Coefficient Values ◽  
Study Results ◽  
Apparent Diffusion ◽  
Adc Values

Abstract Background We aimed to investigate whether there is a difference between intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (IHCC) and liver metastases of gastrointestinal system (GIS) adenocarcinoma in terms of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values. Patients and methods From January 2018 to January 2020, we retrospectively examined 64 consecutive patients with liver metastases due to gastrointestinal system adenocarcinomas and 13 consecutive IHCC in our hospital’s medical records. After exclusions, fifty-three patients with 53 liver metastases and 10 IHCC were included in our study. We divided the patients into two groups as IHCC and liver metastases of GIS adenocarcinoma. For mean apparent diffusion coefficient (ADCmean) values, the region of interests (ROI) was placed in solid portions of the lesions. ADCmean values of groups were compared. Results The mean age of IHCC group was 62.50 ± 13.49 and mean age of metastases group was 61.15 ± 9.18. ADCmean values were significantly higher in the IHCC group compared to the metastatic group (p < 0.001). ROC curves method showed high diagnostic accuracy (AUC = 0.879) with cut-off value of < 1178 x 10-6 mm2/s for ADCmean (Sensitivity = 90.57, Specificity = 70.0, positive predictive value [PPV] = 94.1, negative predictive value [NPV] = 58.3) in differentiating adenocarcinoma metastases from IHCC. Conclusions The present study results suggest that ADC values have a potential role for differentiation between IHCC and GIS adenocarcinoma liver metastases which may be valuable for patient management.

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.

scholarly journals Prediction of Early Response to Chemotherapy in Breast Cancer Liver Metastases by Diffusion-Weighted MR Imaging

2019 ◽  
Vol 18 ◽  
pp. 153303381984294 ◽  
Author(s):  
Genji Bai ◽  
Yating Wang ◽  
Yan Zhu ◽  
Lili Guo
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Diffusion Coefficient ◽  
Apparent Diffusion Coefficient ◽  
Liver Metastases ◽  
Early Response ◽  
Apparent Diffusion Coefficient Values ◽  
Apparent Diffusion Coefficient Value ◽  
Response To Chemotherapy ◽  
Apparent Diffusion ◽  
Breast Cancer Liver Metastases

Objective: To determine whether change in apparent diffusion coefficient value could predict early response to chemotherapy in breast cancer liver metastases. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively studied 42 patients (86 lesions) with breast cancer liver metastases who had undergone conventional magnetic resonance imaging and diffusion-weighted imaging (b = 0.700 s/mm2) before and after chemotherapy. Maximum diameter and mean apparent diffusion coefficient value (×10−3 mm2/s) of liver metastases from breast cancer were evaluated. The grouping reference was based on magnetic resonance imaging according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST). Analysis of variance and receiver–operating characteristic analyses were performed. Results: Eighty-six metastases were classified as 40 responders and 46 nonresponders. A statistically significant correlation was found between prechemotherapy and postchemotherapy apparent diffusion coefficient values in responders, which were 0.9 ± 0.16 × 10−3 mm2/s, 1.05 ± 0.12 × 10−3 mm2/s, 1.26 ± 0.12 × 10−3 mm2/s, and 1.33 ± 0.87 × 10−3 mm2/s, respectively. No statistically significant difference was found between prechemotherapy and postchemotherapy apparent diffusion coefficient values in nonresponders. Differences were statistically significant between responders and nonresponders at prechemotherapy, 2 weeks after chemotherapy, and 4 weeks after chemotherapy ( P = 0.014, P = .001, and P = .000, respectively). Receiver operating characteristic curves showed that apparent diffusion coefficient values could predict treatment response early at 2 weeks after chemotherapy with 64.5% sensitivity and 91.8% specificity. Conclusion: The change in apparent diffusion coefficient value may be a sensitive indicator to predict early response to chemotherapy in breast cancer liver metastases.

scholarly journals Quantitative Evaluation of apparent diffusion coefficient in a large multi-unit institution using the QIBA diffusion phantom.

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joshua P Yung ◽  
Yao Ding ◽  
Ken-Pin Hwang ◽  
Carlos E Cardenas ◽  
Hua Ai ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Diffusion Coefficient ◽  
Apparent Diffusion Coefficient ◽  
Coefficient Of Variation ◽  
Diffusion Weighted Imaging ◽  
Diffusion Weighted ◽  
Apparent Diffusion Coefficient Values ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Apparent Diffusion ◽  
Adc Values ◽  
The One

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to determine the quantitative variability of diffusion weighted imaging and apparent diffusion coefficient values across a large fleet of MR systems. Using a NIST traceable magnetic resonance imaging diffusion phantom, imaging was reproducible and the measurements were quantitatively compared to known values. Methods: A fleet of 23 clinical MRI scanners was investigated in this study. A NIST/QIBA DWI phantom was imaged with protocols provided with the phantom. The resulting images were analyzed and ADC maps were generated. User-directed region-of-interests on each of the different vials provided ADC measurements among a wide range of known ADC values. Results: Three diffusion phantoms were used in this study and compared to one another. From the one-way analysis of the variance, the mean and standard deviation of the percent errors from each phantom were not significantly different from one another. The low ADC vials showed larger errors and variation and appear directly related to SNR. Across all the MR systems and data, the coefficient of variation was calculated and Bland-Altman analysis was performed. ADC measurements were similar to one another except for the vials with the lower ADC values, which had a higher coefficient of variation. Conclusion: ADC values among the three phantoms showed good agreement and were not significantly different from one another. The large percent errors seen primarily at the low ADC values were shown to be a consequence of the SNR dependence and very little bias was observed between magnetic strengths and manufacturers. ADC values between diffusion phantoms were not statistically significant. Future investigations will be performed to study differences in magnetic field strength, vendor, MR system models, gradients, and bore size. More data across different MR platforms would facilitate quantitative measurements for multi-platform and multi-site imaging studies. With the increasing usage of diffusion weighted imaging in the clinic, the characterization of ADC variability for MR systems provides an improved quality control over the MR systems.

Impact of mandated prospectively reported apparent diffusion coefficient values on the rates of positivity for clinically significant prostate cancer by PI-RADS score

2020 ◽  
pp. 028418512091561
Author(s):  
Hiram Shaish ◽  
Randy Casals ◽  
Firas Ahmed ◽  
Jasnit Makkar ◽  
Sven Wenske
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Diffusion Coefficient ◽  
Apparent Diffusion Coefficient ◽  
Chi Square ◽  
Apparent Diffusion Coefficient Values ◽  
Apparent Diffusion ◽  
Adc Values ◽  
Clinically Significant ◽  
Magnetic Resonance Imaging Mri ◽  
The Impact

Background Prior research has shown that retrospectively measured apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) of prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) lesions is associated with clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) on targeted biopsy suggesting that ADC should be measured and reported prospectively. Purpose To assess the impact of mandatory prospective measurement of ADC on the rates of positivity across PI-RADS scores for csPCa. Material and Methods Consecutive patients who underwent ultrasound (US)-MRI fusion prostate biopsy from August 2018 to July 2019 and who had prospectively reported ADC were compared to control patients who did not. Rates of positivity by PI-RADS category were computed and compared using Chi-square. Multivariable regression was performed. Results In total, 126 patients (median age 65 years) with 165 prostate lesions (19, 51, 70, and 25 PI-RADS 2, 3, 4, and 5, respectively) and prospectively reported ADC values were compared to 113 control patients (median age 66 years) with 157 prostate lesions (17, 42, 64, and 34 PI-RADS 2, 3, 4, and 5, respectively). Rates of positivity across PI-RADS scores were similar between the two cohorts; 11%, 25%, 55%, and 76% and 0%, 21%, 56%, and 62% for PI-RADS 2, 3, 4, and 5 in the test and control cohorts, respectively (Chi-square P = 0.78). Multivariate logistic regression showed no significant association between the presence of prospectively measured ADC and csPCa (odds ratio 1.1, 95% confidence interval 0.7–1.7, P = 0.82). Conclusion Prospective ADC measurement may not impact PI-RADS category assignments or positivity rates for csPCa under current guidelines. Future versions of PI-RADS may need to incorporate ADC into scoring rules to realize their potential.

Apparent Diffusion Coefficient Values for Neuroendocrine Liver Metastases

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mehmet Ali Gultekin ◽  
Hacı Mehmet Turk ◽  
Ismail Yurtsever ◽  
Dilek Hacer Cesme ◽  
Mesut Seker ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Diffusion Coefficient ◽  
Apparent Diffusion Coefficient ◽  
Liver Metastases ◽  
Apparent Diffusion Coefficient Values ◽  
Apparent Diffusion ◽  
Neuroendocrine Liver Metastases

Accuracy of apparent diffusion coefficient in differentiation of glioblastoma from metastasis

2021 ◽  
pp. 197140092098367
Author(s):  
Sanaz Beig Zali ◽  
Farbod Alinezhad ◽  
Mahnaz Ranjkesh ◽  
Mohammad H Daghighi ◽  
Masoud Poureisa
Keyword(s):  
Diffusion Coefficient ◽  
Standard Deviation ◽  
Glioblastoma Multiforme ◽  
Brain Metastasis ◽  
Apparent Diffusion Coefficient ◽  
Predictive Value ◽  
Magnetic Resonance Images ◽  
Peritumoral Edema ◽  
Apparent Diffusion Coefficient Values ◽  
Apparent Diffusion

Background Brain metastasis and glioblastoma multiforme are two of the most common malignant brain neoplasms. There are many difficulties in distinguishing these diseases from each other. Purpose The purpose of this study was to determine whether the mean apparent diffusion coefficient and absolute standard deviation derived from apparent diffusion coefficient measurements can be used to differentiate glioblastoma multiforme from brain metastasis based on cellularity levels. Material and methods Magnetic resonance images of 34 patients with histologically verified brain tumors were evaluated retrospectively. Apparent diffusion coefficient and standard deviation values were measured in the enhancing tumor, peritumoral region, and contralateral healthy white matter. Then, to determine whether there was a statistical difference between brain metastasis and glioblastoma multiforme, we analyzed different variables between the two groups. Results Neither mean apparent diffusion coefficient values and ratios nor standard deviation values and ratios were significantly different between glioblastoma multiforme and brain metastasis. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis of the logistic model with backward stepwise feature selection yielded an area under the curve of 0.77, a specificity of 84%, a sensitivity of 67%, a positive predictive value of 83.33%, and a negative predictive value of 78.26% for distinguishing between glioblastoma multiforme and brain metastasis. The absolute standard deviation and standard deviation ratios were significantly higher in the peritumoral edema compared to the tumor region in each case. Conclusion Apparent diffusion coefficient values and ratios, as well as standard deviation values and ratios in peritumoral edema, cannot be used to differentiate edema with infiltration of tumor cells from vasogenic edema. However, standard deviation values could successfully characterize areas of peritumoral edema from the tumoral region in each case.

scholarly journals Functional imaging in non-small cell lung carcinoma: Correlation between standardized uptake values and apparent diffusion coefficient values

2018 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 3721-3726
Author(s):  
Necdet Poyraz ◽  
Cihan Şimşek ◽  
Celalettin Korkmaz ◽  
Buğra Kaya
Keyword(s):  
Diffusion Coefficient ◽  
Apparent Diffusion Coefficient ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Small Cell Lung ◽  
Cell Lung Carcinoma ◽  
Apparent Diffusion Coefficient Values ◽  
Standardized Uptake Values ◽  
Pet Ct ◽  
Apparent Diffusion ◽  
Adc Values

Objective: To investigate the relationship between apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values and standard uptake value (SUV) in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Methods: PET/CT and diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (DW MRI) were performed in 73 consecutive patients with histologically verified NSCLC.  Analysing the PET/CT data calculation of the maximum and mean SUV was performed. The mean and minimum ADC values were measured directly on the parametric ADC maps. Results: Significant inverse correlations were found between ADCmean and SUVmean (r = - 0.53; p < 0.001) as well as ADCmin and SUVmax (r = - 0.71; p < 0.001). Conclusions: The significant negative correlations between ADC and SUV suggest an association between tumor cellularity and metabolic activity in NSCLC.

scholarly journals Apparent diffusion coefficient values of cryptorchid testes and malignant transformation of cryptorchidism (MTC) (seminoma) in postpubertal patients

2021 ◽  
pp. 20200624
Author(s):  
Renwei Liu ◽  
Jianhua Li ◽  
Yixiang Jiang ◽  
Zhiqing Wu ◽  
Yanzi Chen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Diffusion Coefficient ◽  
Apparent Diffusion Coefficient ◽  
Malignant Transformation ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Characteristic Curve ◽  
Adc Value ◽  
Apparent Diffusion Coefficient Values ◽  
Apparent Diffusion ◽  
Adc Values ◽  
Sensitivity Specificity

Objectives: Diffusion-weighted imaging signal contrast can be quantified by apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) maps, which reflect the diffusion properties of the examined tissue and are helpful for identifying pathology. To determine ADC values of cryptorchid testes in post-pubertal patients and assess performance for characterizing cryptorchid testes. Methods: The medical records from 35 patients with unilateral scrotal vacuity were retrospectively reviewed. Data were analyzed in three groups: Group A, normal testes (i.e. the contralateral testes of the patients with cryptorchidism or MTC); Group B, cryptorchid testes; and Group C, malignant transformation of cryptorchidism (MTC) (seminoma). DWI used b-values of 0 and 800 s/mm2. Mean ADC values were compared using the independent samples t-test. The ability of ADC values was assessed using receiver operating characteristic curve analysis. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were calculated. Results: Mean ADC values for normal testes, cryptorchid testes, and MTC were 1.18 ± 0.18×10−3 mm2/s, 1.82 ± 0.40×10−3 mm2/s, and 0.80 ± 0.06×10−3 mm2/s, respectively. There were statistically significant differences in mean ADC values between normal testes and cryptorchid testes or MTC (p < 0.001). The cut-off ADC value for differentiating normal testes from cryptorchid testes was 1.47 × 10−3 mm2/s. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were 88%, 91%, and 90%, respectively. The cut-off ADC value for differentiating normal testes from MTC was 1.22 × 10−3 mm2/s. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were 100%, 31%, and 43%, respectively. Conclusion: ADC values of cryptorchid testes may be used to inform clinical decision-making and also monitor testicular function in patients who retain undescended testicles or post-operatively. Advances in knowledge: Mean ADC values of cryptorchidism and MTC (seminoma) were used to reflect their pathological features.

scholarly journals Apparent Diffusion Coefficient Measurement in Mediastinal Lymphadenopathies: Differentiation between Benign and Malignant Lesions

2017 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
pp. 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fethi Emre Ustabasioglu ◽  
Cesur Samanci ◽  
Deniz Alis ◽  
Nilay Sengul Samanci ◽  
Osman Kula ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Diffusion Coefficient ◽  
Apparent Diffusion Coefficient ◽  
Predictive Value ◽  
Area Under The Curve ◽  
Threshold Value ◽  
Diagnostic Value ◽  
Mediastinal Lymphadenopathy ◽  
Adc Value ◽  
Apparent Diffusion ◽  
Adc Values

Objectives:We aimed to prospectively assess the diagnostic value of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) measurement in the differentiation of benign and malignant mediastinal lymphadenopathies.Materials and Methods:The study included 63 consecutive patients (28 women, 35 men; mean age 59.3 years) with 125 mediastinal lymphadenopathies. Echoplanar diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging of the mediastinum was performed with b-factors of 0 and 600 mm2/s before mediastinoscopy and mediastinotomy, and ADC values were measured. The ADC values were compared with the histological results, and statistical analysis was done.P< 0.05 was considered statistically significant.Results:The mean ADC value of malignant mediastinal lymphadenopathy (1.030 ± 0.245 × 10−3mm2/s) was significantly lower (P< 0.05) when compared to benign lymphadenopathies (1.571 ± 0.559 × 10−3mm2/s). For differentiating malignant from benign mediastinal lymphadenopathy, the best result was obtained when an ADC value of 1.334 × 10−3mm2/s was used as a threshold value; area under the curve 0.848, accuracy 78.4%, sensitivity 66%, specificity of 86%, positive predictive value 76.7%, and negative predictive value of 79.2%. Interobserver agreement was excellent for ADC measurements.Conclusions:ADC measurements could be considered an important supportive method in differentiating benign from malignant mediastinal lymphadenopathies.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document