Bonarelli Chloé, Teixeira Pedro Augusto Gondim, Hossu Gabriela, Meyer Jean-Baptiste, Chen Bailiang, Gay Frédérique, Blum Alain
1 Service de Radiologie Guilloz, CHU Nancy, Rue du Maréchal de Lattre de Tassigny, 54000 Nancy, France.
2 CICIT, Vandoeuvre-lès-Nancy, France.
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2015 Jul;205(1):W106-13. doi: 10.2214/AJR.14.13865.
The objective of our study was to assess the impact of two methods of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) selection on the diagnostic performance of DWI in the characterization of nonfatty soft-tissue masses.
Sixty-five histologically confirmed soft-tissue tumors imaged from November 2009 through October 2012 were evaluated. The minimal ADC (ADCmin) and average ADC (ADCavg) values for each tumor were obtained using two ROI-positioning methods: manual and semiautomatic. Two readers correlated the findings to lesion histology and morphology on conventional MRI sequences.
The ADCmin values obtained using the manual method presented a better sensitivity with a similar specificity when compared with the ADCmin values obtained using the semiautomatic method (manual vs semiautomatic: 75-83% and 59-63% vs 58-67% and 63% and 63%, respectively). The interobserver agreement for the ADCmin values was similar between the ADC selection methods (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.81 and 0.87 for manual and semiautomatic methods, respectively). In the subgroup of solid lesions, the ADCavg values obtained using the manual method offered a better sensitivity for benign-malignant differentiation (60-81% vs 60% and 60% for ADCavg and ADCmin, respectively).
The ADCmin values obtained with manual ROI positioning offered the best diagnostic performance for tumor characterization. The semiautomatic method yielded similar specificity values. For solid masses, the ADCavg values were better correlated with tumor histology than the ADCmin values.
本研究的目的是评估两种表观扩散系数(ADC)选择方法对磁共振扩散加权成像(DWI)在非脂肪性软组织肿块特征性诊断中的影响。
对2009年11月至2012年10月间65例经组织学证实的软组织肿瘤进行评估。使用手动和半自动两种感兴趣区(ROI)定位方法获取每个肿瘤的最小ADC值(ADCmin)和平均ADC值(ADCavg)。两名阅片者将这些结果与传统MRI序列上病变的组织学和形态学表现进行关联。
与半自动方法获得的ADCmin值相比,手动方法获得的ADCmin值具有更高的敏感性和相似的特异性(手动法与半自动法:敏感性分别为75 - 83%和59 - 63%,特异性分别为58 - 67%、63%和63%)。两种ADC选择方法之间,ADCmin值的观察者间一致性相似(手动法和半自动法的组内相关系数分别为0.81和0.87)。在实性病变亚组中,手动方法获得的ADCavg值在良恶性鉴别方面具有更高的敏感性(ADCavg为60 - 81%,ADCmin分别为60%和60%)。
手动ROI定位获得的ADCmin值在肿瘤特征性诊断中具有最佳性能。半自动方法产生的特异性值相似。对于实性肿块,ADCavg值比ADCmin值与肿瘤组织学的相关性更好。