期刊文献+

磁共振扩散加权成像单指数模型与扩散峰度成像模型在61例肾透明细胞癌分级中的对比 被引量:4

Comparison of the value of mono-exponential mode and diffusion kurtosis imaging mode in grading clear cell renal cell carcinoma using magnetic resonance diffusion-weighted imaging
原文传递
导出
摘要 目的探讨磁共振扩散加权成像(DWI)单指数模型和扩散峰度成像(DKI)模型在预测肾透明细胞癌(ccRCC)病理分级中的价值差异。方法前瞻性纳入经病理结果证实的ccRCC患者61例,根据Fuhrman分级将其分为低级别组27例(Ⅰ级10例、Ⅱ级17例)和高级别组34例(Ⅲ级19例、Ⅳ级15例)。患者均行肾脏常规单指数DWI序列和DKI序列扫描,测量参数包括ADC值、各向异性分数(FA)、平均扩散系数(MD)、平均扩散峰度(MK)、轴向扩散峰度(Ka)以及径向扩散峰度(Kr)值。多组间比较采用单因素方差分析(ANOVA),利用独立样本t检验进行两组间均数的比较,使用受试者工作特征(ROC)曲线得出DWI、DKI各参数的曲线下面积(AUC)、敏感度、特异度,并用Delong检验比较各参数的AUC值,以评价各参数对分级的诊断效能。结果①ADC、MD、MK、Ka、Kr值在正常肾实质、低级别及高级别ccRCC间的差异有统计学意义(P<0.05),FA值在3组间的差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。正常肾实质、低级别及高级别ccRCC的ADC值分别为(2.10±0.16)×10^-3mm^2/s、(1.70±0.34)×10^-3mm^2/s、(1.20±0.32)×10^-3mm^2/s,FA值分别为0.26±0.06、0.26±0.11、0.28±0.14,MD值分别为(6.02±0.43)×10^-3mm^2/s、(5.10±0.96)×10^-3mm^2/s、(3.70±0.76)×10^-3mm^2/s,MK值分别为0.49±0.04、0.57±0.07、0.84±0.20,Ka值分别为0.39±0.04、0.48±0.14、0.65±0.19,Kr值分别为0.53±0.05、0.66±0.18、0.98±0.29。与正常肾实质比较,低级别与高级别ccRCC患者的ADC、MD值均逐渐减低,MK、Ka及Kr值均逐渐升高,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05),FA值差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。②绘制ROC曲线,得出ADC、MD、MK、Ka及Kr值鉴别低级别、高级别ccRCC的截断值分别为1.50×10^-3mm^2/s、4.49×10^-3mm^2/s、0.71、0.51、0.68,敏感度分别为85.3%、87.5%、79.2%、83.3%、95.8%,特异度分别为75.2%、90.6%、100.0%、85.3%、75.4%;各参数鉴别低级别、高级别ccRCC的AUC分别为ADC值0.831,MD值0.884,MK值0.950,Ka值0.832,Kr值0.874,其中以MK值的AUC最高。结论与单指数扩散模型相比,DKI模型,特别是其衍生出的参数MK,更适合作为ccRCC病理分级预测的成像技术。 Objective To compare the value of diffusion kurtosis imaging(DKI)and diffusion weighted imaging(DWI)mono-exponential mode in grading clear cell renal cell carcinoma(ccRCC).Methods Sixty-one patients with pathologically proven ccRCC were enrolled in this prospective clinical study.The patients were divided into low grade group(10 with gradeⅠand 17 with gradeⅡ)and high-grade group(19 with gradeⅢand 15 with gradeⅣ)according to the Fuhrman classification system.All patients underwent DWI examination by using both mono-exponential mode and DKI mode.The ADC,fractional anisotropy(FA),mean diffusivity(MD),mean kurtosis(MK),axial kurtosis(Ka)and radial kurtosis(Kr)values were measured,respectively.One-way analysis of variance(ANOVA)was used to compare the difference among three groups,and the independent sample t test was used to compare the difference between two groups.The AUC,sensitivity,and specificity of DWI and DKI parameters were calculated by using receiver-operating characteristic(ROC)analysis,then these AUC values were compared by Delong test to evaluate the diagnostic efficacy of the parameters.Results①There were statistical differences in ADC,MD,MK,Ka,and Kr values among the normal renal parenchyma,low-grade and high-grade ccRCC groups(P<0.05).The difference in FA value among the three groups was not statistically significant(P>0.05).The ADC values of the normal renal parenchyma,low-grade and high-grade ccRCC were(2.10±0.16)×10^-3mm^2/s,(1.70±0.34)×10^-3mm^2/s,and(1.20±0.32)×10^-3mm^2/s,FA values were 0.26±0.06,0.26±0.11,and 0.28±0.14,MD values were(6.02±0.43)×10^-3mm^2/s,(5.10±0.96)×10^-3mm^2/s,and(3.70±0.76)×10^-3mm^2/s,MK values were 0.49±0.04,0.57±0.07,and 0.84±0.20,Ka values were 0.39±0.04,0.48±0.14,and 0.65±0.19,Kr values were 0.53±0.05,0.66±0.18,and 0.98±0.29,respectively.Compared with the normal renal parenchyma,the ADC and MD values of patients with low-grade and high-grade ccRCC were gradually decreased,and the MK,Ka,and Kr values were all gradually increased(P<0.05).The difference in FA value was not statistically significant(P>0.05).②ROC analysis showed that the cut-off values of ADC,MD,MK,Ka and Kr in predicting pathological grade of ccRCC were 1.50×10^-3mm^2/s,4.49×10^-3mm^2/s,0.71,0.51,0.68,the sensitivity were 85.3%,87.5%,79.2%,83.3%,95.8%,and the specificity were 75.2%,90.6%,100.0%,85.3%,75.4%,respectively.The area under the curve(AUC)of ADC,MD,MK,Ka and Kr was 0.831,0.884,0.950,0.832 and 0.874,among which the AUC of the MK value was the highest.Conclusion Compared with DWI mono-exponential mode,DKI mode,especially its derived parameter MK,is more suitable to serve as an imaging technique for predicting the pathological grade of ccRCC.
作者 罗昕 何兵 聂清生 侯震波 董军 李玉花 曾祥芹 刘伟 孔德民 曹金凤 LUO Xin;HE Bing;NIE Qingsheng;HOU Zhenbo;DONG Jun;LI Yuhua;ZENG Xiangqin;LIU Wei;KONG Demin;CAO Jinfeng(Department of Radiology,Zibo Central Hospital,Zibo 255036,Shandong,China;Department of Urology,Zibo Central Hospital,Zibo 255036,Shandong,China;Department of Pathology,Zibo Central Hospital,Zibo 255036,Shandong,China)
出处 《山东大学学报(医学版)》 CAS 北大核心 2020年第7期89-95,共7页 Journal of Shandong University:Health Sciences
基金 山东省医药卫生科技发展计划(2018WS001) 淄博市科学技术发展计划(2017kj010041)。
关键词 肾透明细胞癌 扩散加权成像 单指数模型 扩散峰度成像模型 Clear cell renal cell carcinoma Diffusion-weighted imaging Mono-exponential mode Diffusion kurtosis imaging mode
  • 相关文献

参考文献5

二级参考文献35

  • 1李涛,高元桂,高育,文载律,梁燕.肾癌假包膜征高场MRI表现特征、病理基础及意义[J].中华放射学杂志,1995,29(11):781-783. 被引量:19
  • 2董柏君 张进 陈勇辉 等.上海仁济医院肾癌数据库资料分析[J].中华泌尿外科杂志,2008,29:222-225.
  • 3Delahunt B, Bethwaite PB, Nacey JN. Outcome prediction for renal cell carcinoma: evaluation of prognostic factors for tumors divided according to histological subtype. Pathology, 2007, 39 : 459-465.
  • 4Kono K, Inoue Y, Nakayama K, et al. The role of diffusion- weighted imaging in patients with brain tumors. AJNR, 2001,22 : 1081-1088.
  • 5Lam JS, Klatte T, Breda A. Staging of renal cell carcinoma:current concepts. Indian J Urol, 2009, 25: 446-454.
  • 6Leibovich BC, Blute ML, Cheville JC. Nephron sparing surgery for appropriately selected renal cell carcinoma between 4 and 7 cm results in outcome similar to radical nephrectomy. J Urol, 2004, 171 : 1066-1070.
  • 7Fuhrman SA, Lasky LC, Limas C. Prognostic significance of morphologic parameters in renal cell carcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol, 1982, 6 : 655-663.
  • 8Ghavamian R, Cheville JC, Lohse CM, et al. Renal cell carcinoma in the solitary kidney : an analysis of complications and outcome after nephron sparing surgery. J Urol, 2002, 168: 454-459.
  • 9Jiang J, Chen Y, Zhou Y, et al. Clear cell renal cell carcinoma: contrast-enhanced ultrasound features relation to tumor size. Eur J Radiol, 2010, 73 : 162-167.
  • 10Cheville JC, Lohse CM, Zincke H, et al. Comparisons of outcome and prognostic features among histologic subtypes of renal cell carcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol, 2003, 27: 612-624.

共引文献62

同被引文献41

引证文献4

二级引证文献6

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部