期刊文献+

乳腺良恶性肿瘤钆喷酸葡胺增强后不同时间点ADC值的评估

ADC evaluation after gadopentetate dimeglumine enhancement in breast tumors
下载PDF
导出
摘要 目的探讨钆喷酸葡胺增强对乳腺病变表观扩散系数(ADC)值的影响,以及增强前及增强后3 min、13 min的ADC值在乳腺良恶性肿瘤中的鉴别效能。方法回顾性分析本院经病理证实的272个乳腺病灶增强前后肿瘤实质的ADC值,分别比较浸润性乳腺癌组、非浸润性乳腺癌组及良性肿瘤组间在增强后3 min、13 min与增强前的ADC值的差异,并绘制ROC曲线,分析其诊断效能。结果浸润性乳腺癌组增强前及增强后3 min的ADC值分别为(0.999±0.167)×10^(-3) mm^(2)/s、(0.934±0.165)×10^(-3) mm^(2)/s,差异有统计学意义(P<0.001),余病理类型增强前后ADC值差异均无统计学意义。增强前、增强后3 min区分肿瘤良恶性ADC值截断值分别为1.23×10^(-3)、1.31×10^(-3) mm^(2)/s,敏感度为92.3%、80.8%,特异度为96.3%、100%;增强前、增强后13 min区分肿瘤良恶性ADC值截断值分别为1.22×10^(-3)、1.30×10^(-3) mm^(2)/s,敏感度为95.7%、92.4%,特异度为91.3%、95.0%;增强前及增强后3 min、13 min的ADC值诊断乳腺病变良恶性的AUC均大于0.95。结论浸润性乳腺癌组增强后3 min ADC值有所下降,但不影响乳腺良恶性肿瘤的鉴别效能;在增强后3 min采集扩散加权成像序列有助于减少总检查时间。 Objective To investigate the effect of gadopentetate dimeglumine enhancement on the apparent diffusion coefficient(ADC)values and the diagnostic efficacy of ADC values in breast tumors.Methods The ADC values of 272 histologically confirmed breast tumors before and after contrast enhancement were retrospectively analyzed.The ADC values between benign,invasive,and non-invasive breast tumors before,at 3 minutes,and 13 minutes after enhancement were compared using receiver operating characteristic(ROC)curve analysis.Results The ADC values of invasive breast cancer were significantly greater(P<0.001)before[(0.999±0.167)×10^(-3) mm^(2)/s]than that at 3 minutes after[(0.934±0.165)×10^(-3) mm^(2)/s]contrast enhancement.There was no significant difference in ADC values between the other breast tumors before and after enhancement.The cut-off ADC values of 1.23×10^(-3) mm^(2)/s before enhancement had 92.3%sensitivity and 96.3%specificity for differentiating benign and malignant tumors compared to 80.8%sensitivity and 100%specificity at cut-off ADC value of 1.31×10^(-3) mm^(2)/s 3 minutes after enhancement.The cut-off ADC values of 1.22×10^(-3) mm^(2)/s before enhancement had 95.7%sensitivity and 91.3%specificity for differentiating benign and malignant tumors compared to 92.4%sensitivity and 95.0%specificity at cut-off ADC value of 1.30×10^(-3) mm^(2)/s 13 minutes after enhancement.The areas under the ROC curves were all greater than 0.95.Conclusion The ADC value of invasive breast cancer decreased at 3 minutes after enhancement without affecting the diagnostic efficacy of breast tumors.The acquisition of diffusion-weighted imaging sequence at 3 minutes instead of 13 minutes after enhancement can reduce the total examination time.
作者 穆兰 敖永胜 王昶翔 李宣乐 赵婕锐 陈洪亮 邱丽华 MU Lan;AO Yongsheng;WANG Changxiang;LI Xuanle;ZHAO Jierui;CHEN Hongliang;QIU Lihua(Medical Imaging Center,The Second People’s Hospital of Yibin,Sichuan 644000,China;Department of Radiology,Third Affiliated Hospital of Chengdu Medical College,Sichuan 611730,China)
出处 《影像诊断与介入放射学》 2024年第3期207-212,共6页 Diagnostic Imaging & Interventional Radiology
基金 四川省科技厅课题(2023YFQ0011) 宜宾市卫生健康委项目(No2023YW008)。
关键词 乳腺癌 扩散加权成像 表观扩散系数 钆喷酸葡胺 磁共振成像 Breast cancer Diffusion-weighted imaging Apparent diffusion coefficient Gadolinium diethylene triamine pentaacetic acid Magnetic resonance imaging
  • 相关文献

参考文献3

二级参考文献14

  • 1Pistolese C A, Perretta T, Cossu E, et al. Value of the correct diagnostic pathway through conventional imaging (mammography and ultrasound) in evaluating breast disease [J]. Radiol Med, 2011, 116(4): 584-594.
  • 2Medeiros L R, Duarte'C S, Rosa D D, et al. Accuracy of magnet- ic resonance in suspicious breast lesions: a systematic quantitative review and meta-analysis[J]. Breast Cancer Res Treat, 2011, 126 (2): 273-285.
  • 3Englander S A, Ulug A M, Brem R, et al. Diffusion imaging of human breast[J]. NMR Biomed, 1997, 10(7) : 348-352.
  • 4Matsumoto Y, Kuroda M, Matsuya R, et al. In vitro experimen- tal study of the relationship between the apparent diffusion coeffi- cient and changes in cellularity and cell morphology[J]. Oncol Rep, 2009, 22(3): 641-648.
  • 5Liu X, Zhou L, Peng W, et al. Effect of intravenous gadolinium- DTPA on diffusion-weighted imaging for prostate lesions and nor- mal tissue at 3.0-Tesla magnetic resonance imaging[J]. Acta Ra- diol, 2011, 52(5): 575-580.
  • 6Yuen S, Yamada K, Goto M, et al. Microperfusion induced ele vation of ADC is suppressed after contrast in breast carcinoma [J]. J MagnResonImaging, 2009, 29(5): 1080-1084.
  • 7Yamada K, Kubota H, Kizu O, et al. Effect of intravenous gad- olinium-DTPA on diffusion-weighted images evaluation of nor- mal brain and infarets[J]. Stroke, 2002, 33(7) : 1799-1802.
  • 8Wang C L, Chea Y W, Boll D T, et al. Effect of gadolinium chelate contrast agents on diffusion weighted MR imaging of the liver, spleen, pancreas and kidney at 3 T[J]. Eur J Radiol, 2011, 80(2): e1-7.
  • 9Firat A K, Sanli B, Karakas H M, et al. The effect of intrave- nous gadolinium-DTPA on diffusion-weighted imaging[J]. Neu- roradiology, 2006, 48(7): 465-470.
  • 10Zhou H Y, Zhang X M, Zeng N L, et al. Use of conventional MR imaging and diffusion weighted imaging for evaluating the risk grade of gastrointestinal stromal tumors[J]. J Magn Reson Imaging, 2012, 36(6): 1395-1401.

共引文献24

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