Suppr超能文献

一项关于头颈部扩散加权磁共振成像和灌注加权磁共振成像应用情况的国际调查。

An international survey of diffusion and perfusion magnetic resonance imaging implementation in the head and neck.

作者信息

Connor Steve, Christoforou Alexander, Touska Philip, Robinson Soraya, Fischbein Nancy J, de Graaf Pim, Péporté Anne R J, Hirvonen Jussi, Hadnadjev Šimonji Darka, Guzmán Pérez-Carrillo Gloria J, Cynthia Wu Xin, Glastonbury Christine, Mosier Kristine M, Srinivasan Ashok

机构信息

School of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King's College London, London, UK.

Department of Neuroradiology, King's College Hospital, London, UK.

出版信息

Eur Radiol. 2025 Feb 4. doi: 10.1007/s00330-025-11370-1.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

The goal of this international survey was to understand how diffusion (DWI) and perfusion imaging (PWI) are being applied to clinical head and neck imaging.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

An online questionnaire focusing on acquisition, clinical indications, analysis, and reporting of qualitative DWI (QlDWI), quantitative DWI (QnDWI) and dynamic contrast-enhanced PWI (DCE-PWI) in the head and neck was circulated to members of the American Society of Head and Neck Radiology (ASHNR) and European Society of Head and Neck Radiology (ESHNR) over a 3-month period. Descriptive statistics and group comparisons were calculated with SPSS® v27.

RESULTS

There were 294 unique respondents (17.6% response rate) from 256 institutions (182 ESHNR, 74 ASHNR). DWI was routinely acquired for some head and neck indications at 95.7% of the respondents' institutions, with 92.5% of radiologists interpreting QlDWI but only 36.7% analysing QnDWI. QlDWI was most frequently applied to primary mucosal masses or the middle ear, whilst QnDWI was routinely used to distinguish tumour histologies, and primary or recurrent carcinoma. DCE-PWI was routinely acquired at 53.6% of institutions and used by 40.8% of respondents, however, there was no clinical scenario in which it was routinely applied by most users. DCE-PWI analysis methods varied, with time-intensity curve classifications being the most frequently reported. Lack of standardisation was identified as a key reason for not implementing QnDWI, whilst numerous factors prevented the adoption of DCE-PWI.

CONCLUSION

There is widespread routine interpretation of QlDWI by head and neck radiologists, but there is considerable variation in the application and analysis of head and neck QnDWI and DCE-PWI.

KEY POINTS

Question How are diffusion (DWI) and dynamic contrast-enhanced perfusion imaging (DCE-PWI) being utilised by head and neck radiologists across a wide range of practices? Findings An international survey demonstrated widespread routine interpretation of qualitative DWI but variable application and analysis of quantitative DWI and DCE-PWI with numerous barriers to implementation. Clinical relevance The survey results will aid discussion on how to standardise and optimally disseminate these MRI techniques in day-to-day practice. More focused education and resource allocation may be required to accelerate the adoption of quantitative DWI and DCE-PWI.

摘要

目的

这项国际调查的目的是了解扩散加权成像(DWI)和灌注成像(PWI)如何应用于临床头颈部成像。

方法和材料

一份关于头颈部定性DWI(QlDWI)、定量DWI(QnDWI)和动态对比增强PWI(DCE-PWI)的采集、临床适应证、分析和报告的在线问卷,在3个月的时间内分发给了美国头颈部放射学会(ASHNR)和欧洲头颈部放射学会(ESHNR)的成员。使用SPSS® v27进行描述性统计和组间比较。

结果

来自256家机构(182家ESHNR,74家ASHNR)的294名独立受访者(回复率17.6%)。95.7%的受访者所在机构针对某些头颈部适应证常规进行DWI检查,92.5%的放射科医生解读QlDWI,但只有36.7%的医生分析QnDWI。QlDWI最常用于原发性黏膜肿物或中耳,而QnDWI通常用于区分肿瘤组织学类型以及原发性或复发性癌。53.6%的机构常规进行DCE-PWI检查,40.8%的受访者使用DCE-PWI,然而,没有哪种临床情况是大多数使用者常规应用的。DCE-PWI的分析方法各不相同,时间-强度曲线分类是最常报告的。缺乏标准化被确定为未实施QnDWI的关键原因,而多种因素阻碍了DCE-PWI的采用。

结论

头颈部放射科医生对QlDWI进行广泛的常规解读,但头颈部QnDWI和DCE-PWI的应用和分析存在很大差异。

关键点

问题头颈部放射科医生在广泛的实践中如何利用扩散加权成像(DWI)和动态对比增强灌注成像(DCE-PWI)?研究结果一项国际调查表明,定性DWI得到广泛的常规解读,但定量DWI和DCE-PWI的应用和分析存在差异,实施存在诸多障碍。临床意义调查结果将有助于讨论如何在日常实践中规范和优化这些MRI技术的传播。可能需要更有针对性的教育和资源分配,以加速定量DWI和DCE-PWI的采用。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验