Rajabi Pouria, Rezakhaniha Bijan, Galougahi Mohammad H Kazemi, Mohammadimehr Mojgan, Sharifnia Hesam, Pakzad Roshanak, Niroomand Hassan
School of Medicine, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Department of Urology, Faculty of Medicine, AJA University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Abdom Radiol (NY). 2025 Jan;50(1):319-335. doi: 10.1007/s00261-024-04454-x. Epub 2024 Jul 31.
This study aims to assess the diagnostic capabilities of Diffusion Kurtosis Imaging (DKI) and Intravoxel Incoherent Motion (IVIM) in prostate cancer (PCa) detection and characterization.
A comprehensive search was conducted across PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library for articles published up to September 10, 2023, that evaluated the diagnostic efficacy of MD, MK, Dt, f, and Dp parameters. Data were pooled using a bivariate mixed-effects regression model and analyzed with R software.
In total, 27 studies were included. The analysis revealed distinct diagnostic efficacies for DKI and IVIM. In the overall model, sensitivity and specificity were 0.807 and 0.797, respectively, with prospective studies showing higher specificity (0.858, p = 0.024). The detection model yielded increased sensitivity (0.845) and specificity (0.812), with DKI outperforming IVIM in both metrics (sensitivity: 0.87, p = 0.043; specificity: 0.837, p = 0.26); MD had high sensitivity (0.88) and specificity (0.82), while MK's specificity was significantly higher (0.854, p = 0.04); Dp's sensitivity was significantly lower (0.64, p = 0.016). In characterization, sensitivity and specificity were 0.708 and 0.735, respectively, with no significant differences between DKI and IVIM or Gleason Scores; MK had higher sensitivity (0.78, p = 0.039), and f's sensitivity was significantly lower (0.51, p = 0.019).
In summary, the study underscores DKI's enhanced diagnostic accuracy over IVIM in detecting PCa, with MK standing out for its precision. Conversely, Dp and f lag in diagnostic performance. Despite these promising results, the study highlights the imperative for standardized protocols and study designs to achieve reliable and consistent outcomes.
本研究旨在评估扩散峰度成像(DKI)和体素内不相干运动(IVIM)在前列腺癌(PCa)检测和特征描述中的诊断能力。
在PubMed、Scopus、科学网和考科蓝图书馆全面检索截至2023年9月10日发表的评估MD、MK、Dt、f和Dp参数诊断效能的文章。使用双变量混合效应回归模型汇总数据并用R软件进行分析。
共纳入27项研究。分析揭示了DKI和IVIM不同的诊断效能。在总体模型中,敏感性和特异性分别为0.807和0.797,前瞻性研究显示特异性更高(0.858,p = 0.024)。检测模型的敏感性(0.845)和特异性(0.812)有所提高,DKI在这两个指标上均优于IVIM(敏感性:0.87,p = 0.043;特异性:0.837,p = 0.26);MD具有高敏感性(0.88)和特异性(0.82),而MK的特异性显著更高(0.854,p = 0.04);Dp的敏感性显著更低(0.64,p = 0.016)。在特征描述方面,敏感性和特异性分别为0.708和0.735,DKI和IVIM或Gleason评分之间无显著差异;MK具有更高的敏感性(0.78,p = 0.039),f的敏感性显著更低(0.51,p = 0.019)。
总之,该研究强调了DKI在检测PCa方面比IVIM具有更高的诊断准确性,MK以其精确性脱颖而出。相反,Dp和f在诊断性能方面滞后。尽管有这些令人鼓舞的结果,但该研究强调了标准化方案和研究设计对于获得可靠和一致结果的必要性。