» Articles » PMID: 29390388

Bladder Cancer: Detection and Image Quality Compared Among IShim, RESOLVE, and Ss-EPI Diffusion-weighted MR Imaging with High B Value at 3.0 T MRI

Overview
Specialty General Medicine
Date 2018 Feb 3
PMID 29390388
Citations 8
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

To compare the detection of bladder neoplasms and image quality among the diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) acquired by the prototype single-shot echo-planar-imaging (ss-EPI) sequence for integrated slice-specific dynamic shimming (iShim), readout segmentation of long variable echo trains (RESOLVE) and conventional ss-EPI sequences.Around 63 patients with 77 bladder lesions were enrolled. The MR protocol included T1WI, T2WI and 3 types of DWI. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and accuracy of each DWI for the detection of bladder tumor were computed. The subjective scores of imaging quality, diagnostic confidence, and detection of tumors of stage T2 or greater were recorded. The contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), signal intensity ratios, and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values were measured. The univariate analysis of variance technique, the Friedman test, and Bland-Altman plots were used in the statistical analysis. Observer performance of tumor T stage was tested using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis.The sensitivity, NPV, and accuracy of iShim (92.75%; 61.54%; 93.51%) for detection of bladder tumor were superior to those of RESOLVE (84.06%; 42.11%; 85.71%) and ss-EPI (86.96%; 47.06%; 88.31%). All qualitative scores of iShim were higher than RESOLVE (all P < .05) and ss-EPI (all P < .05). The CNR, signal intensity ratios between bladder lesion and urine, lesion, and submucosal stalk (or nearby normal bladder wall), and between distal normal bladder wall and urine of iShim (39.84 ± 12.11, 2.40 ± 0.60, 1.98 ± 0.43, 1.28 ± 0.16) were higher than RESOLVE (16.97 ± 7.08, 1.62 ± 0.41, 1.52 ± 0.42, 1.15 ± 0.29, all P < .05) and ss-EPI (27.89 ± 9.65, 1.66 ± 0.46, 1.57 ± 0.50, 0.99 ± 0.22, all P < .05). No significant difference of ADC values were found for iShim and RESOLVE (P=0.46), iShim, and ss-EPI (P = 0.97), RESOLVE and ss-EPI (P = .48). The Az value for the detection of tumors of stage T2 or greater was slightly higher with the iShim DWI sequence (0.89) than with the RESOLVE (0.87, P = 0.72) or ss-EPI (0.85, P = .38) sequence.The iShim DWI has relatively better detection of bladder tumor and image quality without significant ADC value difference.

Citing Articles

Comparative analysis of image quality and diagnostic performance among SS-EPI, MS-EPI, and rFOV DWI in bladder cancer.

Takeuchi M, Higaki A, Kojima Y, Ono K, Maruhisa T, Yokoyama T Jpn J Radiol. 2024; .

PMID: 39548050 DOI: 10.1007/s11604-024-01694-1.


Potential clinical feasibility of synthetic MRI in bladder tumors: a comparative study with conventional MRI.

Li M, Fu W, Ouyang L, Cai Q, Huang Y, Yang X Quant Imaging Med Surg. 2023; 13(8):5109-5118.

PMID: 37581035 PMC: 10423390. DOI: 10.21037/qims-22-1419.


Image quality evaluation of diffusion-weighted imaging in bladder cancer: a comparison between integrated slice-specific dynamic shimming and single-shot echo-planar imaging.

Wang Y, Chen S, Zhang W, Xiao W, Su J, Zhang R Quant Imaging Med Surg. 2023; 13(4):2526-2537.

PMID: 37064386 PMC: 10102749. DOI: 10.21037/qims-22-851.


Comparison of reduced field-of-view DWI and full field-of view DWI for the differentiation between non-muscle invasive bladder cancer and muscle invasive bladder cancer using VI-RADS.

Juri H, Higashiyama A, Yamamoto K, Narumi Y, Azuma H, Yamamoto K PLoS One. 2022; 17(7):e0271470.

PMID: 35857788 PMC: 9299291. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0271470.


High-Resolution DWI with Simultaneous Multi-Slice Readout-Segmented Echo Planar Imaging for the Evaluation of Malignant and Benign Breast Lesions.

Peng S, Guo Y, Zhang X, Tao J, Liu J, Zhu W Diagnostics (Basel). 2021; 11(12).

PMID: 34943509 PMC: 8700489. DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics11122273.


References
1.
Yamada Y, Kobayashi S, Isoshima S, Arima K, Sakuma H, Sugimura Y . The usefulness of diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging in bladder cancer staging and functional analysis. J Cancer Res Ther. 2015; 10(4):878-82. DOI: 10.4103/0973-1482.138225. View

2.
Takeuchi M, Sasaki S, Ito M, Okada S, Takahashi S, Kawai T . Urinary bladder cancer: diffusion-weighted MR imaging--accuracy for diagnosing T stage and estimating histologic grade. Radiology. 2009; 251(1):112-21. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2511080873. View

3.
Gatidis S, Graf H, Weiss J, Stemmer A, Kiefer B, Nikolaou K . Diffusion-weighted echo planar MR imaging of the neck at 3 T using integrated shimming: comparison of MR sequence techniques for reducing artifacts caused by magnetic-field inhomogeneities. MAGMA. 2016; 30(1):57-63. DOI: 10.1007/s10334-016-0582-z. View

4.
Xia C, Liu X, Peng W, Li L, Zhang J, Meng W . Readout-segmented echo-planar imaging improves the image quality of diffusion-weighted MR imaging in rectal cancer: Comparison with single-shot echo-planar diffusion-weighted sequences. Eur J Radiol. 2016; 85(10):1818-1823. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2016.08.008. View

5.
El-Assmy A, Abou-El-Ghar M, Mosbah A, El-Nahas A, Refaie H, Hekal I . Bladder tumour staging: comparison of diffusion- and T2-weighted MR imaging. Eur Radiol. 2009; 19(7):1575-81. DOI: 10.1007/s00330-009-1340-7. View