磁共振动态增强扫描定量分析方法评价肺部肿块良恶性初步研究

Abstract
Figure/Table
References (21)
Related Citation (15)

Download: PDF (0 KB) HTML (1 KB)
Export: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

Abstract Objective: To investigate the feasibility of quantitative analysis parameters of dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI (DCE-MRI) in diagnosis of lung neoplasms and assess the differences of quantitative MR pharmacokinetic parameters volume transfer constant(Ktrans), exchange rate constant(Kep) and extravascular extracellular volume fraction(ve) in lung neoplasms. Methods: Three Tesla MR examinations were performed in 77 patients confirmed by biopsy and the quantitative MR pharmaeokinetic parameters including Ktrans, Kep and ve were obtained. Independent two sample t test was used between benign and malignant lung lesions. Finally, the areas under the ROC curve(AUC) of Ktrans, Kep and ve between malignant and benign lesions were compared. Results: The mean Ktrans, Kep and ve of poorly differentiated adenocarcinoma(n=26) were(0.270±0.089) min-1, (0.926±0.475) min-1 and (0.340±0.144). The mean Ktrans, Kep and ve of poorly differentiated squamous cell carcinoma(n=13) were (0.268±0.066) min-1, (0.997±0.464) min-1 and (0.293±0.091). The mean Ktrans, Kep and ve of small-cell lung cancer were (0.238±0.074) min-1, (0.617±0.369) min-1 and (0.412±0.312). The mean Ktrans, Kep and ve of benign lesions(n=24) were (0.190±0.084) min-1, (0.569±0.271) min-1 and (0.392±0.207). There was significant difference between malignant and benign lesions in either Ktrans or Kep(t=3.697, 3.883, respectively, P<0.05). There was no significant difference between malignant and benign lesions in ve(t=1.341, P＞0.05). Ktrans and Kep values of benign lesions were significantly lower than those of squamous cell carcinoma and adenocarcinoma(both P＜0.05). No significant difference was observed between squamous cell carcinoma and adenocarcinoma in Ktrans or Kep(both P＞0.05). The AUCs of Ktrans and Kep between malignant and benign lesions were 0.741 and 0.715. The sensitivity of Ktrans and Kep were 88.4％ and 39.5％, and the specificity of Ktrans and Kep were 54.2％ and 95.8％. Conclusion: The differential diagnosis of benign and malignant lung lesions by Ktrans and Kep is applicable.

Key words： Lung neoplasms Biopsy, needle Magnetic resonance imaging

Received: 08 February 2017

PACS:	Ｒ734.2
	Ｒ445.2

	Service

	E-mail this article
	Add to my bookshelf
	Add to citation manager
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	Articles by authors
	SHI Zhao-fei
	LIU Xu-zhong
	BO Gen-ji

Cite this article:

SHI Zhao-fei,LIU Xu-zhong,BO Gen-ji. A preliminary study of diagnosing lung neoplasms with quantitative analysis of DCE-MRI[J]. JOURNAL OF CHINA MEDICAL IMAGING, 2017, 28(7): 475-479.

URL:

http://www.jccmi.com.cn/EN/ OR http://www.jccmi.com.cn/EN/Y2017/V28/I7/475

[1]Westerhof JP, Fischer U, Moritz JD, et al. MR imaging of mammographically detected clustered microcalcifications: is there any value?[J]. Radiology, 1998, 207(3): 675-681.
[2]Ohno Y, Hatabu H, Takenaka D, et al. Solitary pulmonary nodules: potential role of dynamic MR imaging in management initial experience[J]. Radiology, 2002, 224(2): 503-511.
[3]Schaefer JF, Vollmar J, Schick F, et al. Solitary pulmonary nodules: dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging-perfusion differences in malignant and benign lesions[J]. Radiology, 2004, 232(2): 544-553.
[4]Tofts PS, Brix G, Buckley DL. Estimating kinetic parameters from dynamic contrast-enhanced T1-weighted MRI of a diffusible tracer: standardized quantities and symbols[J]. J Magn Reson Imaging, 1999, 10(3): 223-232.
[5]Choyke PL, Dwyer AJ, Knopp MV, et al. Functional tumor imaging with dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging[J]. J Magn Reson Imaging, 2003, 17(5): 509-520.
[6]Baek HM, Yu HJ, Chen JH, et al. Quantitative correlation between 1H MRS and dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI of human breast cancer[J]. Magn Reson Imaging, 2008, 26(4): 523-531.
[7]李春媚，陈敏，李飒英，等. 3.0T MR动态增强扫描定量分析诊断前列腺癌的初步研究[J]. 中华放射学杂志，2011，45（1）：50-54.
[8]Hou Z, Wang Y, Thng CH, et al. Automatic region-of-interest segmentation and registration of dynamic contrast-enhanced images of colorectal tumors[J]. Phys Med Biol, 2014, 59(23): 7361-7381.
[9]Geith T, Biffar A, Schmidt G, et al. Quantitative analysis of acute benign and malignant vertebral body fractures using dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI[J]. AJR, 2013, 200(6): 635-643.
[10]Port RE, Knopp MV, Hoffmann U, et al. Multi-compartment analysis of gadolinium chelate kinetics: blood-tissue exchange in mammary tumors as monitored by dynamic MR imaging[J]. J Magn Reson Imaging, 1999, 10(3): 233-241.
[11]Yu CW, Shih TT, Hsu CY, et al. Correlation between pancreatic microcirculation and type 2 diabetes in patients with coronary artery disease: dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging[J]. Radiology, 2009, 252(3): 704-711.
[12]Amarnath J, Sangeeta T, Mehta SB. Role of quantitative pharmacokinetic parameter(transfer constant: Ktrans) in the characterization of breast lesions on MRI[J]. Ind J Radiol Imaging, 2013, 23(1): 19-25.
[13]Vos EK, Litjens GJ, Kobus T, et al. Assessment of prostate cancer aggressiveness using dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging at 3T[J]. Eur Urol, 2013, 64(3): 448-455.
[14]Barrett T, Brechbiel M, Bemardo M, et al. MRI of tumor angiogenesis[J]. J Magn Reson Imaging, 2007, 26(2): 235-249.
[15]Baik SH, Jin GY, Han YM, et al. Usefulness of tissue permeability factor in differentiating benign and malignant pulmonary lesions on dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI[J]. J Kor Soc Radiol, 2013, 69(1): 57-65.
[16]Ng CS, Raunig DL, Jackson EF, et al. Reproducibility of perfusion parameters in dynamic contrast enhanced MRI of lung and liver tumors: effect on estimates of patient sample size in clinical trials and on individual patient responses[J]. AJR, 2010, 194(2): 134-140.
[17]Langer DL, der Kwast TH, Evans AJ, et al. Prostate cancer detection with multi-parametric MRI: logistic regression analysis of quantitative T2 diflusion-weighted imaging, and dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI[J]. J Magn Reson Imaging, 2009, 30(2): 327-334.
[18]Tofs PS. Modeling tracer kinetics in dynamic Gd-DTPA MR imaging[J]. J Magn Reson Imaging, 1997, 7(1): 91-101.
[19]Lowry M, Zelhof B, Liney GP, et al. Analysis of prostate DCE-MRI comparison of fast exchange limit and fast exchange regimen pharmacokinetic models in the discrimination of malignant from normal tissue[J]. Invest Radiol, 2009, 44(9): 577-584.
[20]Wang Y, Huang W, Panicek DM. Feasibility of using limited-population-based arterial input function for pharmacokinetic modeling of osteosarcoma dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI data[J]. Magn Reson Med, 2008, 59(5): 83-89.
[21]Kono R, Fujimoto K, Terasaki H, et al. Dynamic MRI of solitary pulmonary nodules: comparison of enhancement patterns of malignant and benign small peripheral lung lesions[J]. AJR, 2007, 188(1): 26-36.