摘要
AIM: To determine the clinical value of diffusion-weight- ed imaging (DWI) for the diagnosis of extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (EHCC) by comparing the diagnostic sensitivity of DWI and magnetic resonance cholan-giopancreatography (MRCP). METHODS: Magnetic resonance imaging examination was performed in 56 patients with suspected EHCC. T1- weighted imaging, T2-weighted imaging, MRCP and DWI sequence, DWI using single-shot spin-echo echoplanar imaging sequence with different b values (100, 300, 500, 800 and 1000 s/mm2), were performed. All cases were further confirmed by surgery or histopathological diagnosis. Two radiologists jointly performed the analysis of the DWI and MRCP images. Apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) value and signal-noise ratio were calculated for EHCC. Sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive predictive value and negative predictive value were tested using DWI with a b value of 500 s/mm2 and MRCP images, respectively. RESULTS: Histopathological diagnosis confirmed that among the 56 cases, 35 were EHCC (20 hilar and 15 distal extrahepatic), 16 were cholangitis, and 5 were cal-culus of bile duct. Thirty-three out of the 35 EHCC cases were detected by DWI. EHCC exhibited differential levels of high signal intensity in DWI and low signal intensity in the ADC map. The mean value for ADC was (1.31 ± 0.29) × 10-3 mm2/s. The detection rate of EHCC was significantly higher by DWI (94.3%) than by MRCP (74.3%) (P < 0.05). There was a significant difference in sensitivity (94.3% vs 74.3%), specificity (100% vs 71.4%), accu- racy (96.4% vs 73.2%), positive predictive value (100% vs 81.3%), and negative predictive value (91.3% vs 62.5%) between DWI and MRCP in diagnosing EHCC. CONCLUSION: DWI has a high sensitivity for the detection of EHCC as it shows the EHCC lesion more unambiguously than MRCP does. DWI can also provide additional clinically important information in EHCC patients when added to routine bile duct MR imaging protocols.
AIM: To determine the clinical value of diffusion-weight- ed imaging (DWI) for the diagnosis of extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (EHCC) by comparing the diagnostic sensitivity of DWI and magnetic resonance cholan-giopancreatography (MRCP). METHODS: Magnetic resonance imaging examination was performed in 56 patients with suspected EHCC. T1- weighted imaging, T2-weighted imaging, MRCP and DWI sequence, DWI using single-shot spin-echo echoplanar imaging sequence with different b values (100, 300, 500, 800 and 1000 s/mm2), were performed. All cases were further confirmed by surgery or histopathological diagnosis. Two radiologists jointly performed the analysis of the DWI and MRCP images. Apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) value and signal-noise ratio were calculated for EHCC. Sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive predictive value and negative predictive value were tested using DWI with a b value of 500 s/mm2 and MRCP images, respectively. RESULTS: Histopathological diagnosis confirmed that among the 56 cases, 35 were EHCC (20 hilar and 15 distal extrahepatic), 16 were cholangitis, and 5 were cal-culus of bile duct. Thirty-three out of the 35 EHCC cases were detected by DWI. EHCC exhibited differential levels of high signal intensity in DWI and low signal intensity in the ADC map. The mean value for ADC was (1.31 ± 0.29) × 10-3 mm2/s. The detection rate of EHCC was significantly higher by DWI (94.3%) than by MRCP (74.3%) (P < 0.05). There was a significant difference in sensitivity (94.3% vs 74.3%), specificity (100% vs 71.4%), accu- racy (96.4% vs 73.2%), positive predictive value (100% vs 81.3%), and negative predictive value (91.3% vs 62.5%) between DWI and MRCP in diagnosing EHCC. CONCLUSION: DWI has a high sensitivity for the detection of EHCC as it shows the EHCC lesion more unambiguously than MRCP does. DWI can also provide additional clinically important information in EHCC patients when added to routine bile duct MR imaging protocols.
