首页    期刊浏览 2024年08月22日 星期四
登录注册

文章基本信息

  • 标题:Comparison of different ROI analysis methods for liver lesion characterization with simplified intravoxel incoherent motion (IVIM)
  • 本地全文:下载
  • 作者:Narine Mesropyan ; Petra Mürtz ; Alois M. Sprinkart
  • 期刊名称:Scientific Reports
  • 电子版ISSN:2045-2322
  • 出版年度:2021
  • 卷号:11
  • DOI:10.1038/s41598-021-01108-6
  • 语种:English
  • 出版社:Springer Nature
  • 摘要:This study investigated the impact of different ROI placement and analysis methods on the diagnostic performance of simplified IVIM-DWI for differentiating liver lesions. 1.5/3.0-T DWI data from a respiratory-gated MRI sequence (b = 0, 50, 250, 800 s/mm 2) were analyzed in patients with malignant (n = 74/54) and benign (n = 35/19) lesions. Apparent diffusion coefficient ADC = ADC(0,800) and IVIM parameters D 1′ = ADC(50,800), D 2′ = ADC(250,800), f 1′ = f(0,50,800), f 2′ = f(0,250,800), and D*' = D*(0,50,250,800) were calculated voxel-wise. For each lesion, a representative 2D-ROI, a 3D-ROI whole lesion, and a 3D-ROI from “good” slices were placed, including and excluding centrally deviating areas (CDA) if present, and analyzed with various histogram metrics. The diagnostic performance of 2D- and 3D-ROIs was not significantly different; e.g. AUC (ADC/D 1′/f 1′) were 0.958/0.902/0.622 for 2D- and 0.942/0.892/0.712 for whole lesion 3D-ROIs excluding CDA at 1.5 T ( p  > 0.05). For 2D- and 3D-ROIs, AUC (ADC/D 1′/D 2′) were significantly higher, when CDA were excluded. With CDA included, AUC (ADC/D 1′/D 2′/f 1′/D*') improved when low percentiles were used instead of averages, and was then comparable to the results of average ROI analysis excluding CDA. For lesion differentiation the use of a representative 2D-ROI is sufficient. CDA should be excluded from ROIs by hand or automatically using low percentiles of diffusion coefficients.
国家哲学社会科学文献中心版权所有