Objectives: To compare Apparent Diffusion Coefficient (ADC) measurements in rectal neoplastic lesionsbefore and after lumen distension obtained with sonography transmission gel.Methods: From January 2014 to July 2016, 25 patients (average age 63.7, range 41–85, 18 males) werestudied for pre-treatment rectal cancer staging using a 1.5 T MRI. Diffusion MRI was obtained using echo-planar imaging with b = 800 value; all patients were studied acquiring diffusion sequences with andwithout rectal lumen distension obtained using sonography transmission gel. In both diffusion sequences,two blinded readers calculated border ADC values and small ADC values, drawing regions of interest respectively along tumour borders and far from tumour borders. Mean ADC values among readers −for each type of ADC measurement − were compared using Wilcoxon matched pairs signed rank test.Correlation was assessed using Pearson analysis.Results: Border ADC mean value for diffusion MR sequences without endorectal contrast was1.122 mm2/sec, with 95% Confidence Interval (CI) = 1.02–1.22; using gel lumen distension, higher bor-der ADC mean value of 1.269 mm2/s (95% CI = 1.16–1.38) was obtained. Wilcoxon matched pairs signedrank test revealed statistical difference (p < 0.01); a strong Pearson correlation was reported, with r valueof 0.69. Small-ADC mean value was 1.038 mm2/s (95% CI = 0.91–1.16) for diffusion sequences acquiredwithout endorectal distension and 1.127 mm2/s (95% CI = 0.98–1.27) for diffusion sequences obtainedafter endorectal gel lumen distension. Wilcoxon analysis did not show statistical difference (p = 0.13). Avery strong positive correlation was observed, with r value of 0.81.Conclusions: ADC measurements are slightly higher using endorectal sonographic transmission gel; ROI should be traced far from tumour borders, to minimize gel filled-pixel along the interface between lumenand lesion. Further studies are needed to investigate better reliability of ADC in rectal cancer MRI usingsonographic gel intraluminal distension.

Diffusion MRI for rectal cancer staging: ADC measurements before and after ultrasonographic gel lumen distension

Palmucci S;FOTI, Pietro Valerio;MILONE, Pietro;Ettorre GC
2017-01-01

Abstract

Objectives: To compare Apparent Diffusion Coefficient (ADC) measurements in rectal neoplastic lesionsbefore and after lumen distension obtained with sonography transmission gel.Methods: From January 2014 to July 2016, 25 patients (average age 63.7, range 41–85, 18 males) werestudied for pre-treatment rectal cancer staging using a 1.5 T MRI. Diffusion MRI was obtained using echo-planar imaging with b = 800 value; all patients were studied acquiring diffusion sequences with andwithout rectal lumen distension obtained using sonography transmission gel. In both diffusion sequences,two blinded readers calculated border ADC values and small ADC values, drawing regions of interest respectively along tumour borders and far from tumour borders. Mean ADC values among readers −for each type of ADC measurement − were compared using Wilcoxon matched pairs signed rank test.Correlation was assessed using Pearson analysis.Results: Border ADC mean value for diffusion MR sequences without endorectal contrast was1.122 mm2/sec, with 95% Confidence Interval (CI) = 1.02–1.22; using gel lumen distension, higher bor-der ADC mean value of 1.269 mm2/s (95% CI = 1.16–1.38) was obtained. Wilcoxon matched pairs signedrank test revealed statistical difference (p < 0.01); a strong Pearson correlation was reported, with r valueof 0.69. Small-ADC mean value was 1.038 mm2/s (95% CI = 0.91–1.16) for diffusion sequences acquiredwithout endorectal distension and 1.127 mm2/s (95% CI = 0.98–1.27) for diffusion sequences obtainedafter endorectal gel lumen distension. Wilcoxon analysis did not show statistical difference (p = 0.13). Avery strong positive correlation was observed, with r value of 0.81.Conclusions: ADC measurements are slightly higher using endorectal sonographic transmission gel; ROI should be traced far from tumour borders, to minimize gel filled-pixel along the interface between lumenand lesion. Further studies are needed to investigate better reliability of ADC in rectal cancer MRI usingsonographic gel intraluminal distension.
2017
Magnetic resonance imaging Rectal neoplasm Contrast media Diffusion weighted MRI Neoplasm staging Diagnostic imaging
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
Diffusion MRI for rectal cancer staging.pdf

solo gestori archivio

Licenza: Non specificato
Dimensione 1.42 MB
Formato Adobe PDF
1.42 MB Adobe PDF   Visualizza/Apri

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11769/241383
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 8
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact