Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.3348/kjr.2018.19.3.443

Utility of Readout-Segmented Echo-Planar Imaging-Based Diffusion Kurtosis Imaging for Differentiating Malignant from Benign Masses in Head and Neck Region  

Ma, Gao (Department of Radiology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University)
Xu, Xiao-Quan (Department of Radiology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University)
Hu, Hao (Department of Radiology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University)
Su, Guo-Yi (Department of Radiology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University)
Shen, Jie (Department of Radiology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University)
Shi, Hai-Bin (Department of Radiology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University)
Wu, Fei-Yun (Department of Radiology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University)
Publication Information
Korean Journal of Radiology / v.19, no.3, 2018 , pp. 443-451 More about this Journal
Abstract
Objective: To compare the diagnostic performance of readout-segmented echo-planar imaging (RS-EPI)-based diffusion kurtosis imaging (DKI) and that of diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) for differentiating malignant from benign masses in head and neck region. Materials and Methods: Between December 2014 and April 2016, we retrospectively enrolled 72 consecutive patients with head and neck masses who had undergone RS-EPI-based DKI scan (b value of 0, 500, 1000, and $1500s/mm^2$) for pretreatment evaluation. Imaging data were post-processed by using monoexponential and diffusion kurtosis (DK) model for quantitation of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC), apparent diffusion for Gaussian distribution ($D_{app}$), and apparent kurtosis coefficient ($K_{app}$). Unpaired t test and Mann-Whitney U test were used to compare differences of quantitative parameters between malignant and benign groups. Receiver operating characteristic curve analyses were performed to determine and compare the diagnostic ability of quantitative parameters in predicting malignancy. Results: Malignant group demonstrated significantly lower ADC ($0.754{\pm}0.167$ vs. $1.222{\pm}0.420$, p < 0.001) and $D_{app}$ ($1.029{\pm}0.226$ vs. $1.640{\pm}0.445$, p < 0.001) while higher $K_{app}$ ($1.344{\pm}0.309$ vs. $0.715{\pm}0.249$, p < 0.001) than benign group. Using a combination of $D_{app}$ and $K_{app}$ as diagnostic index, significantly better differentiating performance was achieved than using ADC alone (area under curve: 0.956 vs. 0.876, p = 0.042). Conclusion: Compared to DWI, DKI could provide additional data related to tumor heterogeneity with significantly better differentiating performance. Its derived quantitative metrics could serve as a promising imaging biomarker for differentiating malignant from benign masses in head and neck region.
Keywords
Head and neck; Differentiation; Magnetic resonance imaging; Diffusion-weighted imaging; Diffusion kurtosis imaging; Tumor; Neoplasm; Imaging biomarker;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 Yu J, Huang DY, Li Y, Dai X, Shi HB. Correlation of standard diffusion-weighted imaging and diffusion kurtosis imaging with distant metastases of rectal carcinoma. J Magn Reson Imaging 2016;44:221-229   DOI
2 Zhao M, Liu Z, Sha Y, Wang S, Ye X, Pan Y, et al. Readoutsegmented echo-planar imaging in the evaluation of sinonasal lesions: a comprehensive comparison of image quality in single-shot echo-planar imaging. Magn Reson Imaging 2016;34:166-172   DOI
3 Bogner W, Pinker-Domenig K, Bickel H, Chmelik M, Weber M, Helbich TH, et al. Readout-segmented echo-planar imaging improves the diagnostic performance of diffusion-weighted MR breast examinations at 3.0 T. Radiology 2012;263:64-76   DOI
4 Roethke MC, Kuder TA, Kuru TH, Fenchel M, Hadaschik BA, Laun FB, et al. Evaluation of diffusion kurtosis imaging versus standard diffusion imaging for detection and grading of peripheral zone prostate cancer. Invest Radiol 2015;50:483-489   DOI
5 Jiang R, Jiang J, Zhao L, Zhang J, Zhang S, Yao Y, et al. Diffusion kurtosis imaging can efficiently assess the glioma grade and cellular proliferation. Oncotarget 2015;6:42380-42393   DOI
6 Xu XQ, Liu J, Hu H, Su GY, Zhang YD, Shi HB, et al. Improve the image quality of orbital 3 T diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging with readout-segmented echo-planar imaging. Clin Imaging 2016;40:793-796   DOI
7 Koyasu S, Iima M, Umeoka S, Morisawa N, Porter DA, Ito J, et al. The clinical utility of reduced-distortion readoutsegmented echo-planar imaging in the head and neck region: initial experience. Eur Radiol 2014;24:3088-3096   DOI
8 Yuan M, Zhang YD, Zhu C, Yu TF, Shi HB, Shi ZF, et al. Comparison of intravoxel incoherent motion diffusionweighted MR imaging with dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI for differentiating lung cancer from benign solitary pulmonary lesions. J Magn Reson Imaging 2016;43:669-679   DOI
9 DeLong ER, DeLong DM, Clarke-Pearson DL. Comparing the areas under two or more correlated receiver operating characteristic curves: a nonparametric approach. Biometrics 1988;44:837-845   DOI
10 Jiang JX, Tang ZH, Zhong YF, Qiang JW. Diffusion kurtosis imaging for differentiating between the benign and malignant sinonasal lesions. J Magn Reson Imaging 2017;45:1446-1454   DOI
11 Rosenkrantz AB, Sigmund EE, Johnson G, Babb JS, Mussi TC, Melamed J, et al. Prostate cancer: feasibility and preliminary experience of a diffusional kurtosis model for detection and assessment of aggressiveness of peripheral zone cancer. Radiology 2012;264:126-135   DOI
12 Sun K, Chen X, Chai W, Fei X, Fu C, Yan X, et al. Breast cancer: diffusion kurtosis MR imaging-diagnostic accuracy and correlation with clinical-pathologic factors. Radiology 2015;277:46-55   DOI
13 Nogueira L, Brandao S, Matos E, Nunes RG, Loureiro J, Ramos I, et al. Application of the diffusion kurtosis model for the study of breast lesions. Eur Radiol 2014;24:1197-1203   DOI
14 Rosenkrantz AB, Sigmund EE, Winnick A, Niver BE, Spieler B, Morgan GR, et al. Assessment of hepatocellular carcinoma using apparent diffusion coefficient and diffusion kurtosis indices: preliminary experience in fresh liver explants. Magn Reson Imaging 2012;30:1534-1540   DOI
15 Lewis-Jones H, Colley S, Gibson D. Imaging in head and neck cancer: United Kingdom national multidisciplinary guidelines. J Laryngol Otol 2016;130:S28-S31
16 Wippold FJ 2nd. Head and neck imaging: the role of CT and MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging 2007;25:453-465
17 Serifog lu I, Oz II, Damar M, Tokgoz O, Yazgan O, Erdem Z. Diffusion-weighted imaging in the head and neck region: usefulness of apparent diffusion coefficient values for characterization of lesions. Diagn Interv Radiol 2015;21:208-214   DOI
18 Schafer J, Srinivasan A, Mukherji S. Diffusion magnetic resonance imaging in the head and neck. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 2011;19:55-67   DOI
19 Srinivasan A, Dvorak R, Perni K, Rohrer S, Mukherji SK. Differentiation of benign and malignant pathology in the head and neck using 3T apparent diffusion coefficient values: early experience. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2008;29:40-44   DOI
20 Iima M, Yano K, Kataoka M, Umehana M, Murata K, Kanao S, et al. Quantitative non-gaussian diffusion and intravoxel incoherent motion magnetic resonance imaging: differentiation of malignant and benign breast lesions. Invest Radiol 2015;50:205-211   DOI
21 Xu XQ, Hu H, Su GY, Liu H, Hong XN, Shi HB, et al. Utility of histogram analysis of ADC maps for differentiating orbital tumors. Diagn Interv Radiol 2016;22:161-167   DOI
22 Jansen JF, Stambuk HE, Koutcher JA, Shukla-Dave A. Nongaussian analysis of diffusion-weighted MR imaging in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: a feasibility study. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2010;31:741-748   DOI
23 Chen Y, Ren W, Zheng D, Zhong J, Liu X, Yue Q, et al. Diffusion kurtosis imaging predicts neoadjuvant chemotherapy responses within 4 days in advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma patients. J Magn Reson Imaging 2015;42:1354-1361   DOI
24 Sakamoto J, Kuribayashi A, Kotaki S, Fujikura M, Nakamura S, Kurabayashi T. Application of diffusion kurtosis imaging to odontogenic lesions: analysis of the cystic component. J Magn Reson Imaging 2016;44:1565-1571   DOI
25 Ginat DT, Mangla R, Yeaney G, Johnson M, Ekholm S. Diffusion-weighted imaging for differentiating benign from malignant skull lesions and correlation with cell density. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2012;198:W597-W601   DOI
26 Thoeny HC, De Keyzer F, King AD. Diffusion-weighted MR imaging in the head and neck. Radiology 2012;263:19-32   DOI
27 Jensen JH, Helpern JA. MRI quantification of non-Gaussian water diffusion by kurtosis analysis. NMR Biomed 2010;23:698-710   DOI
28 Yuan J, Yeung DK, Mok GS, Bhatia KS, Wang YX, Ahuja AT, et al. Non-gaussian analysis of diffusion weighted imaging in head and neck at 3T: a pilot study in patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma. PLoS One 2014;9:e87024   DOI