Triexponential function analysis of diffusion-weighted MRI for diagnosing prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: To evaluate more detailed information noninvasively through on diffusion and perfusion in prostate cancer (PCa) using triexponential analysis of diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI). METHODS: Sixty-three prostate cancer patients underwent preoperative 3.0 Tesla MRI including eight b-values DWI. Triexponential analysis was performed to obtain three diffusion coefficients (Dp , Df , Ds ), as well as fractions (Fp , Ff , Fs ). Each diffusion parameter for cancerous lesions and normal tissues was compared and the relationship between diffusion parameters and Gleason score (GS) was assessed. K(trans) , Ve , and the ratios of intracellular components measured in histopathological specimens were compared with diffusion parameters. RESULTS: Dp was significantly greater for cancerous lesions than normal peripheral zone (PZ) (P < 0.001), whereas Dp in transition zone (TZ) showed no significant difference (P = 0.74, 95% confidence interval (CI) = -4.69-6.48). Ds was significantly smaller for each cancerous lesions in PZ and TZ (P < 0.001, respectively). There was no significant difference in Df between cancerous lesions and normal tissues in PZ and TZ (P = 0.07, 95% CI = -0.29-0.12 and P = 0.53, 95% CI = -3.51-2.29, respectively). D obtained with biexponential analysis were significantly smaller in cancerous lesions than in normal tissue in PZ and TZ (P < 0.001 for both), while D* in PZ and TZ showed no significant difference (P = 0.14, 95% CI = -1.60-0.24 and P = 0.31, 95% CI = -3.43-1.16, respectively). Dp in PZ and TZ showed significant correlation with K(trans) (R = 0.85, P < 0.001; R = 0.81, P < 0.001, respectively), while D(*) in PZ obtained with biexponential analysis showed no such correlation (P = 0.08, 95% CI = -0.14-0.30). Fs was significantly correlated with intracellular space fraction evaluated in histopathological specimens in PZ and TZ cancer (R = 0.41, P < 0.05; R = 0.59, P < 0.001, respectively). Ff and Fs correlated significantly with GS in PZ and TZ cancer (PZ: R = -0.44, P < 0.05; R = 0.37, P < 0.05, TZ: R = -0.59, P < 0.05; R = 0.57, P < 0.05, respectively). CONCLUSION: Triexponential analysis is a noninvasive approach that can provide more detailed information regarding diffusion and perfusion of PCa than biexponential analysis.

Assessment of bolus injection protocol with appropriate concentration for quantitative assessment of pulmonary perfusion by dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging.

PURPOSE: To determine the appropriate concentration for quantitative assessment of dynamic contrast-enhanced pulmonary MR imaging. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 40 consecutive patients with small bronchioalveolar carcinoma underwent perfusion single-photon emission tomography (SPECT) and three-dimensional (3D) dynamic MR imaging with a 3D radiofrequency spoiled gradient-echo sequence. In each patient, 5 mL of contrast media with 0.1, 0.3, and 0.5 mmol/mL were administered at a rate of 5 mL/second. All patients were divided into two groups (<70 kg and > or =70 kg) for assessment of appropriate concentration to quantitatively assess regional perfusion parameter in routine clinical practice. Pulmonary blood flow (PBF) in each protocol was calculated from a signal intensity (SI)-time course curve. Differences and limits of agreement of PBF between dynamic MR imaging (PBF(MR)) using three different concentrations and perfusion SPECT (PBF(SPECT)) were statistically compared in both patient groups. RESULTS: PBF(MR) using 0.3 mmol/mL in the <70-kg group and 0.5 mmol/mL in the > or =70-kg group showed no significant difference compared with PBF(SPECT) (P > 0.05). Limits of agreements in 0.3 mmol/mL in the <70-kg group and 0.5 mmol/mL in the > or =70-kg group were smaller than those of the other concentrations and small enough for clinical purposes. CONCLUSION: Appropriate concentrations provide accurate and reproducible assessments of regional pulmonary perfusion parameters on 3D dynamic MR perfusion imaging. We suggest using 5 mL of contrast media with 0.3 mmol/mL for patients weighing less than 70 kg and 0.5 mmol/mL for patients weighing 70 kg or more.