• AJR Am J Roentgenol · Feb 2020

    Diagnostic Value of Whole-Body DWI With Background Body Suppression Plus Calculation of Apparent Diffusion Coefficient at 3 T Versus 18F-FDG PET/CT for Detection of Bone Metastases.

    • Wenping Sun, Mei Li, Yifeng Gu, Zhenkui Sun, Zhongling Qiu, and Yiyi Zhou.
    • Institute of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Shanghai Jiao Tong University Affiliated Sixth People's Hospital, 600, Yishan Rd, Shanghai, 200233, China.
    • AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2020 Feb 1; 214 (2): 446-454.

    AbstractOBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the diagnostic performance of whole-body (WB) DWI with background body suppression (DWIBS) combined with calculation of the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) value at 3 T compared with the diagnostic performance of 18F-FDG PET/CT for detecting bone metastases in patients with malignant tumors. SUBJECTS AND METHODS. Thirty-nine consecutive patients with suspected bone metastases underwent both WB DWIBS and FDG PET/CT. Imaging findings were independently interpreted using qualitative and quantitative analyses. Pathologic findings or clinical or radiologic follow-up data were used as the diagnostic reference standard. The sensitivity, specificity, overall accuracy, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of both modalities were calculated. The ADCs of benign lesions and metastases were compared. RESULTS. A total of 213 metastatic bone segments were confirmed among 39 patients. The sensitivity, specificity, overall accuracy, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were 93.0%, 87.8%, 89.6%, 79.8%, and 96.0%, respectively, for WB DWIBS and 92.5%, 92.0%, 92.1%, 85.7% and 95.9%, respectively, for FDG PET/CT. The specificity of WB DWIBS in detecting bone metastases was significantly lower than that of FDG PET/CT (p < 0.05), whereas the sensitivity, overall accuracy, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value in detecting bone metastases were not significantly different between WB DWIBS and FDG PET/CT (p > 0.05). The ADCs for benign lesions were significantly higher than those for metastases (p < 0.001). In ROC curve analysis, the AUC value was 0.901. A cutoff ADC value of 920.5 × 10-6 mm2s-1 distinguished benign lesions from bone metastases with a sensitivity of 92.9% and a specificity of 73.4%. CONCLUSION. WB DWIBS coupled with ADC analysis at 3 T is effective for detecting bone metastases.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.