Tumor detectability and conspicuity comparison of standard b1000 and ultrahigh b2000 diffusion-weighted imaging in rectal cancer.

Abstract

METHODS

Fifty-five patients for a total of 81 3T DWI-MR scans were retrospectively evaluated by two differently experienced readers. A comparison between b1000 and b2000 for tumor detectability and conspicuity was performed. The conspicuity was qualitatively and quantitatively assessed by using three-point scale and whole tumor volume manual delineation, respectively. Receiver-operating characteristic curve (ROC) with area under the curve (AUC) analysis provided diagnostic accuracy in tumor detectability of restaging MR scans. Qualitative scores and quantitative features including mean signal intensity, variance, 10th percentile and 90th percentile, were compared using the Wilcoxon test. Interobserver agreement (IOA) for qualitative and quantitative data was calculated using Cohen's Kappa and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) respectively.

PURPOSE

To compare tumor detectability and conspicuity of standard b = 1000 s/mm2 (b1000) versus ultrahigh b = 2000 s/mm2 (b2000) diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) in rectal cancer.

CONCLUSION

Ultrahigh b value (b2000) may improve rectal cancer conspicuity and introbserver agreement maintaining comparable diagnostic accuracy to standard b1000.

RESULTS

Diagnostic accuracy was comparable between b1000 and b2000 for both readers (p > 0.05). Overall quality scores were significantly better for b2000 than b1000 (2.29 vs 1.65 Reader 1, p = 0.01; 2.18 vs 1.69 Reader 2, p = 0.04). IOA was equally good for both b values (k = 0.86 b1000, k = 0.86 b2000). Quantitative analysis revealed more uniform signal (measured in variance) of b2000 in both healthy surrounding tissue (p < 0.05) and tumor (p < 0.05), with less outliers (measured using 10th and 90th percentile). Additionally, b2000 offered lower mean signal intensity in tissue sorrounding the tumor (p < 0.05). Finally, ICC improved from 0.92 (b1000) to 0.97 (b2000).

More about this publication

Abdominal radiology (New York)
  • Volume 44
  • Issue nr. 11
  • Pages 3595-3605
  • Publication date 01-11-2019

This site uses cookies

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website.