Renal Lesions: Characterization with Diffusion-weighted Imaging versus Contrast-enhanced MR Imaging

被引:227
|
作者
Taouli, Bachir [1 ]
Thakur, Ravi K. [1 ]
Mannelli, Lorenzo [1 ]
Babb, James S. [1 ]
Kim, Sooah [1 ]
Hecht, Elizabeth M. [1 ]
Lee, Vivian S. [1 ]
Israel, Gary M. [1 ]
机构
[1] NYU, Dept Radiol, Langone Med Ctr, New York, NY 10016 USA
关键词
HISTOGRAM ANALYSIS; ABDOMINAL ORGANS; HEPATIC-LESIONS; BRAIN; DIFFERENTIATION; GADOLINIUM; PERFUSION; COEFFICIENT; KIDNEY; REGION;
D O I
10.1148/radiol.2512080880
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
Purpose: To compare the diagnostic performance of diffusion-weighted (DW) magnetic resonance (MR) imaging with that of contrast material-enhanced (CE) MR imaging and to assess the performance of these examinations combined for the characterization of renal lesions, with MR follow-up and histopathologic analysis as the reference standards. Materials and Methods: The institutional review board waived the requirement of informed patient consent for this retrospective HIPAA-compliant study. One hundred nine renal lesions in 64 patients (46 men, 18 women; mean age, 60.7 years) were evaluated with CE MR imaging and breath-hold DW imaging performed with various b values. Renal lesions were characterized with use of CE MR criteria, and apparent diffusion coefficients(ADCs) were measured. The ADCs of benign and malignant lesions were compared at Mann-Whitney testing. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was performed to assess the accuracy of DW imaging and CE MR imaging in the diagnosis of renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Results: The 109 renal lesions-81 benign lesions and 28 RCCs had a mean diameter of 4.2 cm +/- 2.5 (standard deviation). The mean ADC for RCCs (1.41 x 10(-3) mm(2)/sec +/- 0.61) was significantly lower (P < .0001) than that for benign lesions (2.23 x 10(-3) mm(2)/sec +/- 0.87) at DW imaging performed with b values of 0, 400, and 800 sec/mm(2). At a cutoff ADC of less than or equal to 1.92 x 10(-3) mm(2)/sec, the area under the ROC curve (AUC), sensitivity, and specificity of DW imaging for the diagnosis of RCCs (excluding angiomyolipomas) were 0.856, 86%, and 80%, respectively. The corresponding AUC, sensitivity, and specificity of CE MR imaging were 0.944, 100%, and 89%, respectively. Combined DW and CE MR imaging had 96% specificity. The AUC for the DW imaging-based diagnosis of solid RCC versus oncocytoma was 0.854. Papillary RCCs had lower ADCs than nonpapillary RCCs. Conclusion: DW imaging can be used to characterize renal lesions; however, compared with CE MR imaging, it is less accurate. DW imaging can be used to differentiate solid RCCs from oncocytomas and characterize the histologic subtypes of RCC. (C) BSNA, 2009
引用
收藏
页码:398 / 407
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Non-mass-like enhancement on contrast-enhanced breast MR imaging: Lesion characterization using combination of dynamic contrast-enhanced and diffusion-weighted MR images
    Yabuuchi, Hidetake
    Matsuo, Yoshio
    Kamitani, Takeshi
    Setoguchi, Taro
    Okafuji, Takashi
    Soeda, Hiroyasu
    Sakai, Shuji
    Hatakenaka, Masamitsu
    Kubo, Makoto
    Tokunaga, Eriko
    Yamamoto, Hidetaka
    Honda, Hiroshi
    [J]. EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY, 2010, 75 (01) : E126 - E132
  • [22] Hepatic pseudolymphoma: imaging features on dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI and diffusion-weighted imaging
    Yang Zhou
    XiaoLin Wang
    Chen Xu
    GuoFeng Zhou
    MengSu Zeng
    PengJu Xu
    [J]. Abdominal Radiology, 2018, 43 : 2288 - 2294
  • [23] Differentiation of subtypes of renal cell carcinoma: dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging versus diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging
    Yamamoto, Akira
    Tamada, Tsutomu
    Ito, Katsuyoshi
    Sone, Teruki
    Kanki, Akihiko
    Tanimoto, Daigo
    Noda, Yasufumi
    [J]. CLINICAL IMAGING, 2017, 41 : 53 - 58
  • [24] Contrast-enhanced and unenhanced diffusion-weighted imaging of the breast at 3 T
    Fanariotis, M.
    Tsougos, I
    Vlychou, M.
    Fezoulidis, I
    Vassiou, K.
    [J]. CLINICAL RADIOLOGY, 2018, 73 (11) : 928 - 935
  • [25] Characterization of Chondroblastic Osteosarcoma: Gadolinium-Enhanced Versus Diffusion-Weighted MR Imaging
    Yakushiji, Toshitake
    Oka, Kiyoshi
    Sato, Hiro
    Yorimitsu, Shigeta
    Fujimoto, Toru
    Yamashita, Yasuyuki
    Mizuta, Hiroshi
    [J]. JOURNAL OF MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING, 2009, 29 (04) : 895 - 900
  • [26] Potential of Noncontrast Magnetic Resonance Imaging With Diffusion-Weighted Imaging in Characterization of Breast Lesions Intraindividual Comparison With Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging
    Baltzer, Pascal A. T.
    Bickel, Hubert
    Spick, Claudio
    Wengert, Georg
    Woitek, Ramona
    Kapetas, Panagiotis
    Clauser, Paola
    Helbich, Thomas H.
    Pinker, Katja
    [J]. INVESTIGATIVE RADIOLOGY, 2018, 53 (04) : 229 - 235
  • [27] Comparison of T2-weighted imaging, diffusion-weighted imaging and contrast-enhanced T1-weighted MR imaging for evaluating perianal fistulas
    Baik, Jiyeon
    Kim, Seung Ho
    Lee, Yedaun
    Yoon, Jung-Hee
    [J]. CLINICAL IMAGING, 2017, 44 : 16 - 21
  • [28] Differential diagnostic value of diffusion-weighted and dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging in non-cystic lesions in floor of the mouth
    Yuan, Ying
    Jiang, Mengda
    Wu, Lizhong
    Tao, Xiaofeng
    [J]. DENTOMAXILLOFACIAL RADIOLOGY, 2019, 48 (03)
  • [29] Added value of diffusion-weighted MR imaging to T2-weighted and dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging in T staging of gastric cancer
    Liu, Song
    He, Jian
    Guan, Wenxian
    Li, Qiang
    Yu, Haiping
    Zhou, Zhuping
    Bao, Shanhua
    Zhou, Zhengyang
    [J]. CLINICAL IMAGING, 2014, 38 (02) : 122 - 128
  • [30] Detection and characterization focal hepatic lesions with diffusion-weighted MR imaging
    Sivrioglu, Ali Kemal
    Ak, Mehmet
    Kara, Kemal
    Deveer, Mehmet
    [J]. ABDOMINAL IMAGING, 2013, 38 (05): : 1182 - 1182