MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.2214/ajr.11.8010

Медицинская библиотека · AJR. American journal of roentgenology · 2012

Comparison of qualitative and quantitative evaluation of diffusion-weighted MRI and chemical-shift imaging in the differentiation of benign and malignant vertebral body fractures.

Geith Tobias, Schmidt Gerwin, Biffar Andreas, Dietrich Olaf, Dürr Hans Roland, Reiser Maximilian, Baur-Melnyk Andrea

Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАПеревод в очереди

Аннотация

OBJECTIVE

The objective of our study was to compare the diagnostic value of qualitative diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI), quantitative DWI, and chemical-shift imaging in a single prospective cohort of patients with acute osteoporotic and malignant vertebral fractures.

SUBJECTS AND

METHODS

The study group was composed of patients with 26 osteoporotic vertebral fractures (18 women, eight men; mean age, 69 years; age range, 31 years 6 months to 86 years 2 months) and 20 malignant vertebral fractures (nine women, 11 men; mean age, 63.4 years; age range, 24 years 8 months to 86 years 4 months). T1-weighted, STIR, and T2-weighted sequences were acquired at 1.5 T. A DW reverse fast imaging with steady-state free precession (PSIF) sequence at different delta values was evaluated qualitatively. A DW echo-planar imaging (EPI) sequence and a DW single-shot turbo spin-echo (TSE) sequence at different b values were evaluated qualitatively and quantitatively using the apparent diffusion coefficient. Opposed-phase sequences were used to assess signal intensity qualitatively. The signal loss between in- and opposed-phase images was determined quantitatively. Two-tailed Fisher exact test, Mann-Whitney test, and receiver operating characteristic analysis were performed. Sensitivities, specificities, and accuracies were determined.

RESULTS

Qualitative DW-PSIF imaging (delta = 3 ms) showed the best performance for distinguishing between benign and malignant fractures (sensitivity, 100%; specificity, 88.5%; accuracy, 93.5%). Qualitative DW-EPI (b = 50 s/mm(2) [p = 1.00]; b = 250 s/mm(2) [p = 0.50]) and DW single-shot TSE imaging (b = 100 s/mm(2) [p = 1.00]; b = 250 s/mm(2) [p = 0.18]; b = 400 s/mm(2) [p = 0.18]; b = 600 s/mm(2) [p = 0.39]) did not indicate significant differences between benign and malignant fractures. DW-EPI using a b value of 500 s/mm(2) (p = 0.01) indicated significant differences between benign and malignant vertebral fractures. Quantitative DW-EPI (p = 0.09) and qualitative opposed-phase imaging (p = 0.06) did not exhibit significant differences, quantitative DW single-shot TSE imaging (p = 0.002) and quantitative chemical-shift imaging (p = 0.01) showed significant differences between benign and malignant fractures.

CONCLUSION

The DW-PSIF sequence (delta = 3 ms) had the highest accuracy in differentiating benign from malignant vertebral fractures. Quantitative chemical-shift imaging and quantitative DW single-shot TSE imaging had a lower accuracy than DW-PSIF imaging because of a large overlap. Qualitative assessment of opposed-phase, DW-EPI, and DW single-shot TSE sequences and quantitative assessment of the DW-EPI sequence were not suitable for distinguishing between benign and malignant vertebral fractures.

Для цитирования: Geith Tobias, Schmidt Gerwin, Biffar Andreas, Dietrich Olaf, Dürr Hans Roland, Reiser Maximilian, Baur-Melnyk Andrea. Comparison of qualitative and quantitative evaluation of diffusion-weighted MRI and chemical-shift imaging in the differentiation of benign and malignant vertebral body fractures.. AJR. American journal of roentgenology. 2012. DOI: 10.2214/ajr.11.8010.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

История · было → стало

Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.