The British journal of radiology · 2020
Histogram analysis from stretched exponential model on diffusion-weighted imaging: evaluation of clinically significant prostate cancer.
Оценочное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
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.
Kim EunJu, Kim Chan Kyo, Kim Hyun Soo, Jang Dong Pyo, Kim In Young, Hwang Jinwoo
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the usefulness of histogram analysis of stretched exponential model (SEM) on diffusion-weighted imaging in evaluating clinically significant prostate cancer (CSC).
METHODS: A total of 85 patients with prostate cancer underwent 3 T multiparametric MRI, followed by radical prostatectomy. Histogram parameters of the tumor from the SEM [distributed diffusion coefficient (DDC) and α] and the monoexponential model [MEM; apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC)] were evaluated. The associations between parameters and Gleason score or Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System v. 2 were evaluated. The area under the receiver operating characteristics curve was calculated to evaluate diagnostic performance of parameters in predicting CSC.
RESULTS: The values of histogram parameters of DDC and ADC were significantly lower in patients with CSC than in patients without CSC (p < 0.05), except for skewness and kurtosis. The value of the 25th percentile of α was significantly lower in patients with CSC than in patients without CSC (p = 0.014). Histogram parameters of ADC and DDC had significant weak to moderate negative associations with Gleason score or Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System v. 2 (p < 0.001), except for skewness and kurtosis. For predicting CSC, the area under the curves of mean ADC (0.856), 50th percentile DDC (0.852), and 25th percentile α (0.707) yielded the highest values compared to other histogram parameters from each group.
CONCLUSION: Histogram analysis of the SEM on diffusion-weighted imaging may be a useful quantitative tool for evaluating CSC. However, the SEM did not outperform the MEM.
ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: Histogram parameters of SEM may be useful for evaluating CSC.
METHODS: A total of 85 patients with prostate cancer underwent 3 T multiparametric MRI, followed by radical prostatectomy. Histogram parameters of the tumor from the SEM [distributed diffusion coefficient (DDC) and α] and the monoexponential model [MEM; apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC)] were evaluated. The associations between parameters and Gleason score or Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System v. 2 were evaluated. The area under the receiver operating characteristics curve was calculated to evaluate diagnostic performance of parameters in predicting CSC.
RESULTS: The values of histogram parameters of DDC and ADC were significantly lower in patients with CSC than in patients without CSC (p < 0.05), except for skewness and kurtosis. The value of the 25th percentile of α was significantly lower in patients with CSC than in patients without CSC (p = 0.014). Histogram parameters of ADC and DDC had significant weak to moderate negative associations with Gleason score or Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System v. 2 (p < 0.001), except for skewness and kurtosis. For predicting CSC, the area under the curves of mean ADC (0.856), 50th percentile DDC (0.852), and 25th percentile α (0.707) yielded the highest values compared to other histogram parameters from each group.
CONCLUSION: Histogram analysis of the SEM on diffusion-weighted imaging may be a useful quantitative tool for evaluating CSC. However, the SEM did not outperform the MEM.
ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: Histogram parameters of SEM may be useful for evaluating CSC.