Diffusion-Weighted Imaging and Chemical Shift Imaging to Differentiate Benign and Malignant Vertebral Lesion: A Hospital-Based Cross-Sectional Study

IF 0.9 Q4 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
Kaneez Fatima, Suprava Naik, Mantu Jain, Sanjeev Kumar Bhoi, Somnath Padhi, Nerbadyswari Deep Bag, Ashutosh Panigrahi, Sudipta Mohakud
{"title":"Diffusion-Weighted Imaging and Chemical Shift Imaging to Differentiate Benign and Malignant Vertebral Lesion: A Hospital-Based Cross-Sectional Study","authors":"Kaneez Fatima, Suprava Naik, Mantu Jain, Sanjeev Kumar Bhoi, Somnath Padhi, Nerbadyswari Deep Bag, Ashutosh Panigrahi, Sudipta Mohakud","doi":"10.1055/s-0043-1772848","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Objective The aim of this study was to evaluate the role of diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) and chemical shift imaging (CSI) for the differentiation of benign and malignant vertebral lesions. Methods Patients with vertebral lesions underwent routine magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) along with DWI and CSI. Qualitative analysis of the morphological features was done by routine MRI. Quantitative analysis of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) from DWI and fat fraction (FF) from CSI was done and compared between benign and malignant vertebral lesions. Results Seventy-two patients were included. No significant difference was noted in signal intensities of benign and malignant lesions on conventional MRI sequences. Posterior element involvement, paravertebral soft-tissue lesion, and posterior vertebral bulge were common in malignant lesion, whereas epidural/paravertebral collection, absence of posterior vertebral bulge, and multiple compression fractures were common in benign vertebral lesion (p < 0.001). The mean ADC value was 1.25 ± 0.27 mm2/s for benign lesions and 0.9 ± 0.19 mm2/s for malignant vertebral lesions (p ≤ 0.001). The mean value of FF was 12.7 ± 7.49 for the benign group and 4.04 ± 2.6 for the malignant group (p < 0.001). A receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis showed that an ADC cutoff of 1.05 × 10−3 mm2/s and an FF cutoff of 6.9 can differentiate benign from malignant vertebral lesions, with the former having 86% sensitivity and 82.8% specificity and the latter having 93% sensitivity and 96.6% specificity. Conclusion The addition of DWI and CSI to routine MRI protocol in patients with vertebral lesions promises to be very helpful in differentiating benign from malignant vertebral lesions when difficulty in qualitative interpretation of conventional MR images arises.","PeriodicalId":51597,"journal":{"name":"Indian Journal of Radiology and Imaging","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Indian Journal of Radiology and Imaging","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0043-1772848","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Abstract Objective The aim of this study was to evaluate the role of diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) and chemical shift imaging (CSI) for the differentiation of benign and malignant vertebral lesions. Methods Patients with vertebral lesions underwent routine magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) along with DWI and CSI. Qualitative analysis of the morphological features was done by routine MRI. Quantitative analysis of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) from DWI and fat fraction (FF) from CSI was done and compared between benign and malignant vertebral lesions. Results Seventy-two patients were included. No significant difference was noted in signal intensities of benign and malignant lesions on conventional MRI sequences. Posterior element involvement, paravertebral soft-tissue lesion, and posterior vertebral bulge were common in malignant lesion, whereas epidural/paravertebral collection, absence of posterior vertebral bulge, and multiple compression fractures were common in benign vertebral lesion (p < 0.001). The mean ADC value was 1.25 ± 0.27 mm2/s for benign lesions and 0.9 ± 0.19 mm2/s for malignant vertebral lesions (p ≤ 0.001). The mean value of FF was 12.7 ± 7.49 for the benign group and 4.04 ± 2.6 for the malignant group (p < 0.001). A receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis showed that an ADC cutoff of 1.05 × 10−3 mm2/s and an FF cutoff of 6.9 can differentiate benign from malignant vertebral lesions, with the former having 86% sensitivity and 82.8% specificity and the latter having 93% sensitivity and 96.6% specificity. Conclusion The addition of DWI and CSI to routine MRI protocol in patients with vertebral lesions promises to be very helpful in differentiating benign from malignant vertebral lesions when difficulty in qualitative interpretation of conventional MR images arises.
弥散加权成像和化学移位成像鉴别良恶性椎体病变:一项基于医院的横断面研究
摘要目的探讨弥散加权成像(DWI)和化学位移成像(CSI)在脊柱良恶性病变鉴别中的作用。方法对椎体病变患者行常规磁共振成像(MRI)、DWI和CSI检查。常规MRI对形态学特征进行定性分析。定量分析DWI的表观扩散系数(ADC)和CSI的脂肪分数(FF),比较良、恶性椎体病变。结果纳入72例患者。在常规MRI序列上良恶性病变的信号强度无显著差异。恶性病变多见于椎体后部受累、椎旁软组织病变和椎体后部隆起,而良性病变多见于硬膜外/椎旁收集、椎体后部隆起缺失和多发压缩性骨折(p <0.001)。良性病变平均ADC值为1.25±0.27 mm2/s,恶性病变平均ADC值为0.9±0.19 mm2/s (p≤0.001)。良性组FF均值为12.7±7.49,恶性组FF均值为4.04±2.6 (p <0.001)。受试者工作特征(ROC)曲线分析显示,ADC截止值为1.05 × 10−3 mm2/s, FF截止值为6.9可以区分椎体良恶性病变,前者敏感性为86%,特异性为82.8%,后者敏感性为93%,特异性为96.6%。结论在常规MRI方案中加入DWI和CSI,有助于在常规MR图像难以定性解释时鉴别椎体病变的良恶性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Indian Journal of Radiology and Imaging
Indian Journal of Radiology and Imaging RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING-
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
115
审稿时长
45 weeks
期刊介绍: Information not localized
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信