Hepp Tobias, Wuest Wolfgang, Heiss Rafael, May Matthias Stefan, Kopp Markus, Wetzl Matthias, Treutlein Christoph, Uder Michael, Wiesmueller Marco
Institute of Medical Informatics, Biometry and Epidemiology, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), 91054 Erlangen, Germany.
Institute of Radiology, University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), 91054 Erlangen, Germany.
Diagnostics (Basel). 2022 Aug 1;12(8):1860. doi: 10.3390/diagnostics12081860.
The aim of this study was to assess the diagnostic value of ADC distribution curves for differentiation between benign and malignant parotid gland tumors and to compare with mean ADC values. 73 patients with parotid gland tumors underwent head-and-neck MRI on a 1.5 Tesla scanner prior to surgery and histograms of ADC values were extracted. Histopathological results served as a reference standard for further analysis. ADC histograms were evaluated by comparing their similarity to a reference distribution using Chi-test-statistics. The assumed reference distribution for benign and malignant parotid gland lesions was calculated after pooling the entire ADC data. In addition, mean ADC values were determined. For both methods, we calculated and compared the sensitivity and specificity between benign and malignant parotid gland tumors and three subgroups (pleomorphic adenoma, Warthin tumor, and malignant lesions), respectively. Moreover, we performed cross-validation (CV) techniques to estimate the predictive performance between ADC distributions and mean values. Histopathological results revealed 30 pleomorphic adenomas, 22 Warthin tumors, and 21 malignant tumors. ADC histogram distribution yielded a better specificity for detection of benign parotid gland lesions (ADC: 75.0% vs. ADC: 71.2%), but mean ADC values provided a higher sensitivity (ADC: 71.4% vs. ADC: 61.9%). The discrepancies are most pronounced in the differentiation between malignant and Warthin tumors (sensitivity ADC: 76.2% vs. ADC: 61.9%; specificity ADC: 81.8% vs. ADC: 68.2%). Using CV techniques, ADC distribution revealed consistently better accuracy to differentiate benign from malignant lesions ("leave-one-out CV" accuracy ADC: 71.2% vs. ADC: 67.1%). ADC histogram analysis using full distribution curves is a promising new approach for differentiation between primary benign and malignant parotid gland tumors, especially with respect to the advantage in predictive performance based on CV techniques.
本研究的目的是评估表观扩散系数(ADC)分布曲线在腮腺良恶性肿瘤鉴别诊断中的价值,并与ADC平均值进行比较。73例腮腺肿瘤患者在手术前接受了1.5特斯拉扫描仪的头颈磁共振成像(MRI)检查,并提取了ADC值的直方图。组织病理学结果作为进一步分析的参考标准。通过使用卡方检验统计量比较ADC直方图与参考分布的相似性来评估ADC直方图。在汇总所有ADC数据后,计算了腮腺良恶性病变的假定参考分布。此外,还确定了ADC平均值。对于这两种方法,我们分别计算并比较了腮腺良恶性肿瘤以及三个亚组(多形性腺瘤、沃辛瘤和恶性病变)之间的敏感性和特异性。此外,我们还采用交叉验证(CV)技术来评估ADC分布和平均值之间的预测性能。组织病理学结果显示有30例多形性腺瘤、22例沃辛瘤和21例恶性肿瘤。ADC直方图分布在检测腮腺良性病变方面具有更高的特异性(ADC:75.0%对ADC:71.2%),但ADC平均值具有更高的敏感性(ADC:71.4%对ADC:61.9%)。这种差异在恶性肿瘤和沃辛瘤的鉴别中最为明显(敏感性ADC:76.2%对ADC:61.9%;特异性ADC:81.8%对ADC:68.2%)。使用CV技术,ADC分布在区分良恶性病变方面始终具有更高的准确性(“留一法”交叉验证准确性ADC:71.2%对ADC:67.1%)。使用完整分布曲线的ADC直方图分析是一种有前景的新方法,可用于鉴别腮腺原发性良恶性肿瘤,特别是基于CV技术在预测性能方面具有优势。