scholarly journals Assessment of histologic prognostic factors of resectable rectal cancer: comparison of diagnostic performance using various apparent diffusion coefficient parameters

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Hang Li ◽  
Guang-wen Chen ◽  
Yi-Sha Liu ◽  
Hong Pu ◽  
Long-lin Yin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rectal Cancer ◽  
Diffusion Coefficient ◽  
Prognostic Factors ◽  
Apparent Diffusion Coefficient ◽  
Diagnostic Performance ◽  
Resectable Rectal Cancer ◽  
Apparent Diffusion

scholarly journals Quantitative T2*-Weighted Imaging and Reduced Field-of-View Diffusion-Weighted Imaging of Rectal Cancer: Correlation of R2* and Apparent Diffusion Coefficient With Histopathological Prognostic Factors

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yang Peng ◽  
Yan Luo ◽  
Xuemei Hu ◽  
Yaqi Shen ◽  
Daoyu Hu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rectal Cancer ◽  
Diffusion Coefficient ◽  
Prognostic Factors ◽  
Apparent Diffusion Coefficient ◽  
Diffusion Weighted Imaging ◽  
Field Of View ◽  
T Stage ◽  
Diffusion Weighted ◽  
Apparent Diffusion ◽  
Adc Values

PurposeTo assess T2*-weighted imaging (T2*WI) and reduced field-of-view diffusion-weighted Imaging (rDWI) derived parameters and their relationships with histopathological factors in patients with rectal cancer.MethodsFifty-four patients with pathologically-proven rectal cancer underwent preoperative T2*-weighted imaging and rDWI in this retrospective study. R2* values from T2*-weighted imaging and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values from rDWI were compared in terms of different histopathological prognostic factors using student’s t-test or Mann-Whitney U-test. The correlations of R2* and ADC with prognostic factors were assessed by Spearman correlation analysis. The diagnostic performances of R2* and ADC were analyzed by receiver operating characteristic curves (ROC) separately and jointly.ResultsSignificant positive correlation was found between R2* values and T stage, lymph node involvement, histological grades, CEA level, the presence of EMVI and tumor deposit (r = 0.374 ~ 0.673, p = 0.000–0.006), with the exception of CA19-9 level, CRM status and tumor involvement in the circumference lumen (TIL). Meanwhile, ADC values negatively correlated with almost all the prognostic factors (r = −0.588 to −0.299, p = 0.000–0.030), except CA19-9 level. The AUC range was 0.724–0.907 for R2* and 0.674–0.887 for ADC in discrimination of different prognostic factors. While showing the highest AUC of 0.913 (0.803–1.000) in differentiation of T stage, combination of R2* and ADC with reference to different prognostic factors did not significantly improve the diagnostic performance in comparison with individual R2*/ADC parameter.ConclusionsR2* and ADC were associated with important histopathological prognostic factors of rectal cancer. R2* might act as additional quantitative imaging marker for tumor characterization of rectal cancer.

scholarly journals Apparent diffusion coefficient cannot discriminate metastatic and non-metastatic lymph nodes in rectal cancer: a meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexey Surov ◽  
Hans-Jonas Meyer ◽  
Maciej Pech ◽  
Maciej Powerski ◽  
Jasan Omari ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rectal Cancer ◽  
Diffusion Coefficient ◽  
Apparent Diffusion Coefficient ◽  
Lymph Nodes ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Adc Value ◽  
Metastatic Lymph Nodes ◽  
Metastatic Lymph ◽  
Apparent Diffusion ◽  
Adc Values

Abstract Background Our aim was to provide data regarding use of diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) for distinguishing metastatic and non-metastatic lymph nodes (LN) in rectal cancer. Methods MEDLINE library, EMBASE, and SCOPUS database were screened for associations between DWI and metastatic and non-metastatic LN in rectal cancer up to February 2021. Overall, 9 studies were included into the analysis. Number, mean value, and standard deviation of DWI parameters including apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values of metastatic and non-metastatic LN were extracted from the literature. The methodological quality of the studies was investigated according to the QUADAS-2 assessment. The meta-analysis was undertaken by using RevMan 5.3 software. DerSimonian, and Laird random-effects models with inverse-variance weights were used to account the heterogeneity between the studies. Mean DWI values including 95% confidence intervals were calculated for metastatic and non-metastatic LN. Results ADC values were reported for 1376 LN, 623 (45.3%) metastatic LN, and 754 (54.7%) non-metastatic LN. The calculated mean ADC value (× 10−3 mm2/s) of metastatic LN was 1.05, 95%CI (0.94, 1.15). The calculated mean ADC value of the non-metastatic LN was 1.17, 95%CI (1.01, 1.33). The calculated sensitivity and specificity were 0.81, 95%CI (0.74, 0.89) and 0.67, 95%CI (0.54, 0.79). Conclusion No reliable ADC threshold can be recommended for distinguishing of metastatic and non-metastatic LN in rectal cancer.

Diagnostic performance of apparent diffusion coefficient parameters for glioma grading

2018 ◽  
Vol 139 (1) ◽  
pp. 61-68 ◽  
Author(s):  
Qun Wang ◽  
JiaShu Zhang ◽  
Xinghua Xu ◽  
XiaoLei Chen ◽  
BaiNan Xu
Keyword(s):  
Diffusion Coefficient ◽  
Apparent Diffusion Coefficient ◽  
Diagnostic Performance ◽  
Glioma Grading ◽  
Apparent Diffusion
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document