Comparison of Biexponential and Monoexponential Model of Diffusion-Weighted Imaging for Distinguishing between Common Renal Cell Carcinoma and Fat Poor Angiomyolipoma

To compare the diagnostic accuracy of intravoxel incoherent motion (IVIM)-derived parameters and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) in distinguishing between renal cell carcinoma (RCC) and fat poor angiomyolipoma (AML). Eighty-three patients with pathologically confirmed renal tumors were included...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Korean journal of radiology 2016, 17(6), , pp.853-863
Hauptverfasser: Ding, Yuqin, Zeng, Mengsu, Rao, Shengxiang, Chen, Caizhong, Fu, Caixia, Zhou, Jianjun
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:To compare the diagnostic accuracy of intravoxel incoherent motion (IVIM)-derived parameters and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) in distinguishing between renal cell carcinoma (RCC) and fat poor angiomyolipoma (AML). Eighty-three patients with pathologically confirmed renal tumors were included in the study. All patients underwent renal 1.5T MRI, including IVIM protocol with 8 b values (0-800 s/mm ). The ADC, diffusion coefficient (D), pseudodiffusion coefficient (D ), and perfusion fraction (f) were calculated. One-way ANOVA was used for comparing ADC and IVIM-derived parameters among clear cell RCC (ccRCC), non-ccRCC and fat poor AML. The diagnostic performance of these parameters was evaluated by using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. The ADC were significantly greater in ccRCCs than that of non-ccRCCs and fat poor AMLs (each < 0.010, respectively). The D and D among the three groups were significantly different (all < 0.050). The f of non-ccRCCs were less than that of ccRCCs and fat poor AMLs (each < 0.050, respectively). In ROC analysis, ADC and D showed similar area under the ROC curve (AUC) values (AUC = 0.955 and 0.964, respectively, = 0.589) in distinguishing between ccRCCs and fat poor AMLs. The combination of D > 0.97 × 10 mm /s, D < 28.03 × 10 mm /s, and f < 13.61% maximized the diagnostic sensitivity for distinguishing non-ccRCCs from fat poor AMLs. The final estimates of AUC (95% confidence interval), sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and accuracy for the entire cohort were 0.875 (0.719-0.962), 100% (23/23), 75% (9/12), 88.5% (23/26), 100% (9/9), and 91.4% (32/35), respectively. The ADC and D showed similar diagnostic accuracy in distinguishing between ccRCCs and fat poor AMLs. The IVIM-derived parameters were better than ADC in discriminating non-ccRCCs from fat poor AMLs.
ISSN:1229-6929
2005-8330
DOI:10.3348/kjr.2016.17.6.853