Exploring the value of arterial spin labeling and six diffusion MRI models in differentiating solid benign and malignant renal tumors.

IF 3.7 Q1 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
Mengmeng Gao, Shichao Li, Guanjie Yuan, Weinuo Qu, Kangwen He, Zhouyan Liao, Ting Yin, Wei Chen, Qian Chu, Zhen Li
{"title":"Exploring the value of arterial spin labeling and six diffusion MRI models in differentiating solid benign and malignant renal tumors.","authors":"Mengmeng Gao, Shichao Li, Guanjie Yuan, Weinuo Qu, Kangwen He, Zhouyan Liao, Ting Yin, Wei Chen, Qian Chu, Zhen Li","doi":"10.1186/s41747-024-00537-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To explore the value of three-dimensional arterial spin labeling (ASL) and six diffusion magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) models in differentiating solid benign and malignant renal tumors.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective study included 89 patients with renal tumors. All patients underwent ASL and ZOOMit diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) examinations and were divided into three groups: clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC), non-ccRCC, and benign renal tumors (BRT). The mean and peak renal blood flow (RBFmean and RBFpeak) from ASL and fourteen diffusion parameters from mono-exponential DWI (Mono_DWI), intravoxel incoherent motion (IVIM), diffusion kurtosis imaging (DKI), stretched exponential model (SEM), fractional order calculus (FROC), and continuous-time random-walk (CTRW) model were analyzed. Binary logistic regression was used to determine the optimal parameter combinations. The diagnostic performance of various MRI-derived parameters and their combinations was compared.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among the six diffusion models, the SEM model achieved the highest performance in differentiating ccRCC from non-ccRCC (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUC] 0.880) and from BRT (AUC 0.891). IVIM model achieved the highest AUC (0.818) in differentiating non-ccRCC from BRT. Among all the MRI-derived parameters, RBFpeak combined with DKI_MK yielded the highest AUC (0.970) in differentiating ccRCC from non-ccRCC, and the combination of RBFpeak, SEM_DDC, and FROC_μ yielded the highest AUC (0.992) for differentiating ccRCC from BRT.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>ASL and all diffusion models showed similar diagnostic performance in differentiating ccRCC from non-ccRCC or BRT, while the IVIM model performed better in distinguishing non-ccRCC from BRT. Combining ASL with diffusion models can provide additional value in predicting ccRCC.</p><p><strong>Relevance statement: </strong>Considering the increasing detection rate of incidental renal masses, accurate discrimination of benign and malignant renal tumors is crucial for decision-making. Combining ASL with diffusion MRI models offers a promising solution to this clinical issue.</p><p><strong>Key points: </strong>All assessed models were effective for differentiating ccRCC from non-ccRCC or BRT. ASL and all diffusion models showed similar performance in differentiating ccRCC from non-ccRCC or BRT. Combining ASL with diffusion models significantly improved diagnostic efficacy in predicting ccRCC. IVIM model could better differentiate non-ccRCC from BRT.</p>","PeriodicalId":36926,"journal":{"name":"European Radiology Experimental","volume":"8 1","pages":"135"},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11621297/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Radiology Experimental","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s41747-024-00537-y","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To explore the value of three-dimensional arterial spin labeling (ASL) and six diffusion magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) models in differentiating solid benign and malignant renal tumors.

Methods: This retrospective study included 89 patients with renal tumors. All patients underwent ASL and ZOOMit diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) examinations and were divided into three groups: clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC), non-ccRCC, and benign renal tumors (BRT). The mean and peak renal blood flow (RBFmean and RBFpeak) from ASL and fourteen diffusion parameters from mono-exponential DWI (Mono_DWI), intravoxel incoherent motion (IVIM), diffusion kurtosis imaging (DKI), stretched exponential model (SEM), fractional order calculus (FROC), and continuous-time random-walk (CTRW) model were analyzed. Binary logistic regression was used to determine the optimal parameter combinations. The diagnostic performance of various MRI-derived parameters and their combinations was compared.

Results: Among the six diffusion models, the SEM model achieved the highest performance in differentiating ccRCC from non-ccRCC (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUC] 0.880) and from BRT (AUC 0.891). IVIM model achieved the highest AUC (0.818) in differentiating non-ccRCC from BRT. Among all the MRI-derived parameters, RBFpeak combined with DKI_MK yielded the highest AUC (0.970) in differentiating ccRCC from non-ccRCC, and the combination of RBFpeak, SEM_DDC, and FROC_μ yielded the highest AUC (0.992) for differentiating ccRCC from BRT.

Conclusion: ASL and all diffusion models showed similar diagnostic performance in differentiating ccRCC from non-ccRCC or BRT, while the IVIM model performed better in distinguishing non-ccRCC from BRT. Combining ASL with diffusion models can provide additional value in predicting ccRCC.

Relevance statement: Considering the increasing detection rate of incidental renal masses, accurate discrimination of benign and malignant renal tumors is crucial for decision-making. Combining ASL with diffusion MRI models offers a promising solution to this clinical issue.

Key points: All assessed models were effective for differentiating ccRCC from non-ccRCC or BRT. ASL and all diffusion models showed similar performance in differentiating ccRCC from non-ccRCC or BRT. Combining ASL with diffusion models significantly improved diagnostic efficacy in predicting ccRCC. IVIM model could better differentiate non-ccRCC from BRT.

探讨动脉自旋标记及六种扩散MRI模型在鉴别实性肾良恶性肿瘤中的价值。
目的:探讨三维动脉自旋标记(ASL)和六种扩散磁共振成像(MRI)模型在鉴别实性肾良恶性肿瘤中的价值。方法:对89例肾脏肿瘤患者进行回顾性研究。所有患者均行ASL和ZOOMit弥散加权成像(DWI)检查,并分为三组:透明细胞肾细胞癌(ccRCC)、非ccRCC和良性肾肿瘤(BRT)。分析ASL的平均和峰值肾血流量(RBFmean和RBFpeak)以及单指数DWI (Mono_DWI)、体素内非相干运动(IVIM)、扩散峰度成像(DKI)、拉伸指数模型(SEM)、分数阶微积分(FROC)和连续时间随机漫步(CTRW)模型的14个扩散参数。采用二元逻辑回归法确定最佳参数组合。比较各种mri衍生参数及其组合的诊断性能。结果:在6种扩散模型中,SEM模型在区分ccRCC与非ccRCC(受者工作特征曲线下面积[AUC] 0.880)和BRT (AUC 0.891)方面表现最好。IVIM模型对非ccrcc和BRT的AUC最高(0.818)。在所有mri衍生参数中,RBFpeak联合DKI_MK鉴别ccRCC与非ccRCC的AUC最高(0.970),RBFpeak联合SEM_DDC和FROC_μ鉴别ccRCC与BRT的AUC最高(0.992)。结论:ASL和所有扩散模型对ccRCC与非ccRCC或BRT的诊断效果相似,而IVIM模型对非ccRCC与BRT的诊断效果更好。将ASL与扩散模型相结合,对ccRCC的预测具有附加价值。相关性声明:考虑到偶发肾肿块的检出率越来越高,准确区分肾肿瘤的良恶性对决策至关重要。将ASL与扩散MRI模型相结合为解决这一临床问题提供了有希望的解决方案。关键点:所有评估的模型都能有效区分ccRCC与非ccRCC或BRT。ASL和所有扩散模型在区分ccRCC与非ccRCC或BRT方面表现相似。ASL联合弥散模型可显著提高ccRCC的诊断效能。IVIM模型能更好地区分非ccrcc和BRT。
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
European Radiology Experimental
European Radiology Experimental Medicine-Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging
CiteScore
6.70
自引率
2.60%
发文量
56
审稿时长
18 weeks
×
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