Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Comparison of conventional diffusion-weighted imaging and intravoxel incoherent motion in differentiating between chromophobe renal cell carcinoma and renal oncocytoma: a preliminary study.
Zhu, Qingqiang; Sun, Jun; Ye, Jing; Zhu, Wenrong; Chen, Wenxin.
Afiliación
  • Zhu Q; Northern Jiangsu People's Hospital Affiliated to Yangzhou University, Yangzhou 225001, China.
  • Sun J; Northern Jiangsu People's Hospital Affiliated to Yangzhou University, Yangzhou 225001, China.
  • Ye J; Northern Jiangsu People's Hospital Affiliated to Yangzhou University, Yangzhou 225001, China.
  • Zhu W; Northern Jiangsu People's Hospital Affiliated to Yangzhou University, Yangzhou 225001, China.
  • Chen W; Northern Jiangsu People's Hospital Affiliated to Yangzhou University, Yangzhou 225001, China.
Br J Radiol ; 97(1158): 1146-1152, 2024 May 29.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38688580
ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE:

Quantitative comparison of the diagnostic efficacy of conventional diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) and intravoxel incoherent motion (IVIM) in differentiating between chromophobe renal cell carcinoma (ChRCC) from renal oncocytoma (RO).

METHODS:

A total of 48 patients with renal tumours who had undergone DWI and IVIM were divided into two groups-ChRCC (n = 28) and RO (n = 20) groups, and the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC), true diffusivity (D), pseudo-diffusion coefficient (D*), perfusion fraction (f) and their diagnostic efficacy were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS:

The D* values were higher in the ChRCCs group compared to the RO groups (0.019 ± 0.003 mm2/s vs 0.008 ± 0.002 mm2/s, P < .05). Moreover, the ADC, D and f values were higher in ROs compared to ChRCCs (0.61 ± 0.08 × 10-3 mm2/s vs 0.51 ± 0.06 × 10-3 mm2/s, 1.02 ± 0.15 × 10-3 mm2/s vs 0.86 ± 0.07 × 10-3 mm2/s, 0.41 ± 0.05 vs 0.28 ± 0.02, P < .05). The areas of the ADC, D, D* and f values under the ROC curves in differentiating ChRCCs from ROs were 0.713, 0.839, 0.856 and 0.906, respectively. The cut-off values of ADC, D, D* and f were 0.54, 0.91, 0.013 and 0.31, respectively. The AUC, sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of the f values were 0.906, 89.3%, 80.0% and 89.6%, respectively. For pairwise comparisons of ROC curves and diagnostic efficacy, IVIM parameters, that is, D, D* and f offered better diagnostic accuracy than ADC in differentiating ChRCCs from ROs (P = .013, .016, and .008) with f having the highest diagnostic accuracy.

CONCLUSION:

IVIM parameters presented better performance than ADC in differentiating ChRCCs from ROs. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE (1) D* values of ChRCCs were higher, while ADC, D and f values were lower than those of RO tumours. (2) f values had the highest diagnostic efficacy in differentiating ChRCC from RO. (3) IVIM parameters, that is, D, D* and f offered better diagnostic accuracy than ADC in differentiating ChRCC from RO (P=.013, .016, and .008).
Asunto(s)
Palabras clave

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Carcinoma de Células Renales / Adenoma Oxifílico / Imagen de Difusión por Resonancia Magnética / Neoplasias Renales Límite: Adult / Aged / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Idioma: En Revista: Br J Radiol Año: 2024 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: China

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Carcinoma de Células Renales / Adenoma Oxifílico / Imagen de Difusión por Resonancia Magnética / Neoplasias Renales Límite: Adult / Aged / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Idioma: En Revista: Br J Radiol Año: 2024 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: China