• Niko Radovic, Gordana Ivanac, Eugen Divjak, Iva Biondic, Antonio Bulum, and Boris Brkljacic.
• Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Dubrava, University of Zagreb School of Medicine, Zagreb, Croatia.
• J Magn Reson Imaging. 2019 May 1; 49 (5): 1381-1390.

BackgroundThe capability of diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) for morphological analysis of breast lesions is underexplored.PurposeTo evaluate the utility of DWI for assessment of morphological features of breast cancer by comparing DWI and dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) MRI findings to determine intermethod and interobserver agreement.Study TypeRetrospective.PopulationSeventy-eight women with pathohistologically proven breast cancer.Field Strength/Sequence1.5T. DWI and DCE images.AssessmentDiffusion-weighted and DCE images were placed in two separate case sets. Three radiologists, blinded to all other information, independently evaluated each case set on two separate occasions. Lesions were interpreted according to the fifth edition of the ACR BI-RADS lexicon.Statistical AnalysisKappa (κ) statistics were calculated in order to assess intermethod and interobserver agreement.ResultsFor values that attained statistical significance (P < 0.05), intermethod agreement ranged from fair (κ = 0.22) for nonmass internal patterns to significant (κ = 0.8) for lesion type. On DWI, interobserver agreement varied from fair (κ = 0.34) for mass shape to significant (κ = 0.75) for lesion type. On DCE MRI, interobserver agreement varied from fair (κ = 0.27) for irregular vs. spiculated mass margin to perfect (κ = 1) for circumscribed vs. noncircumscribed mass margin.Data ConclusionOn the whole, there was moderate intermethod agreement. The values of interobserver agreement were mostly similar between DWI and DCE MRI. This suggests that DWI is applicable for morphological assessment of breast cancer, notwithstanding substantially inferior spatial resolution compared to DCE MRI.Level Of Evidence3 Technical Efficacy: Stage 3 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2019;49:1381-1390.© 2018 International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine.

23 keywords...

hide…