
浏览全部资源
扫码关注微信
纸质出版:2014
移动端阅览
周红俐,赵建农,郭大静,罗银灯,何晓静,吴伟,周治明.扩散张量成像联合3D-1H-MRS对前列腺癌诊断效能的研究[J].陆军军医大学学报(原第三军医大学学报),2014,36(01):63-67.
Zhou Hongli,Zhao Jiannong,Guo Dajing,Luo Yindeng,He Xiaojing,Wu Wei,Zhou Zhiming.Diagnostic value of diffusion tensor imaging combined with 3D-1H-MRS for prostate cancer[J].J Amry Med Univ (J Third Mil Med Univ),2014,36(01):63-67.
周红俐,赵建农,郭大静,罗银灯,何晓静,吴伟,周治明.扩散张量成像联合3D-1H-MRS对前列腺癌诊断效能的研究[J].陆军军医大学学报(原第三军医大学学报),2014,36(01):63-67. DOI:
Zhou Hongli,Zhao Jiannong,Guo Dajing,Luo Yindeng,He Xiaojing,Wu Wei,Zhou Zhiming.Diagnostic value of diffusion tensor imaging combined with 3D-1H-MRS for prostate cancer[J].J Amry Med Univ (J Third Mil Med Univ),2014,36(01):63-67. DOI:
目的 探讨3T MRI扩散张量成像(diffusion tensor imaging
DTI)联合波谱成像(MR spectroscopy,MRS)用于前列腺癌的诊断价值。 方法 45例临床高度可疑的前列腺癌患者同时行DTI、MRS检查,与病检结果对照,分析癌区和非癌区的平均表观扩散系数值(apparent diffusion coefficients
ADC)、各向异性分数值(fractional anisotropy
FA)、(胆碱+肌酐)/枸橼酸盐值(choline+creatinine/citrate
CC/C)的差异。通过逻辑回归构建诊断模型,对比分析ADC、FA、DTI、MRS、DTI+MRS诊断前列腺癌的ROC曲线下面积(the area under the ROC curve
AUC),计算DTI、MRS、“DTI和MRS”、“DTI或MRS”的敏感度、特异度、阳性预测值、阴性预测值。 结果 38例患者顺利通过检查并获得可分析图像。无论外周带或中央区,癌区的ADC值均显著低于非癌区(
P
0.01),癌区的FA、CC/C值均显著高于非癌区(
P
0.01,
P
0.05)。在外周带,DTI+MRS的AUC显著高于单独应用DTI、MRS(
P
0.01);在中央区,DTI+MRS的AUC显著高于DTI(
P
0.01),与MRS比较差异无统计学意义(
P
0.05)。“DTI和MRS”在外周带及中央区均获得最高特异度,显著高于单独的DTI、MRS(
P
0.05);“DTI 或MRS”获得最高敏感度,在外周带显著高于单独的MRS(
P
0.01),在中央区显著高于单独的DTI(
P
0.01)。 结论 DTI联合MRS较单独DTI、MRS更有助于前列腺癌的诊断。
Objective To evaluate the diagnostic value of diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) combined with MR spectroscopy (MRS) for prostate cancer. Methods A total of 45 patients with high suspicion of prostate cancer admitted in our depa
rtment from May 2012 to June 2013 were enrolled in this study. They all underwent DTI and MRS. MRI data were correlated with their pathological results. The average values of apparent diffusion coefficients (ADC)
fractional anisotropy (FA) and choline+creatinine/citrate (CC/C) in cancerous and noncancerous regions were measured. Logistic regression was used to construct diagnostic models
the areas under the ROC curve (AUC) were compared between ADC
FA
DTI
MRS
and DTI+MRS. The sensitivity
specificity
positive predictive value and negative predictive value of DTI
MRS
and DTI+MRS
and DTI/MRS were calculated. Results There were 38 patients acquired images that could be analyzed. Whether in peripheral zone (PZ) or central zone (CZ)
the ADC value of cancerous regions was significantly lower than that of noncancerous regions (
P
0.01)
while the FA and CC/C value were significantly higher than noncancerous regions (
P
0.01
P
0.05). In the PZ
the AUC for DTI+MRS was significantly higher than that for either DTI or MRS alone (
P
0.01). In the CZ
the AUC for DTI+MRS was significantly higher than that of DTI alone (
P
0.01)
but no difference than MRS (
P
0.05). DTI+MRS had the highest specificity both in PZ and CZ
significantly higher than that for either DTI or MRS (
P
0.05). DTI/ MRS had the highest sensitivity
significantly higher than MRS in the PZ (
P
0.01) and significantly higher than DTI in the CZ (
P
0.01). Conclusion The combination of DTI and MRS performs better than either technique alone in the diagnosis of prostate cancer.
0
浏览量
0
下载量
0
CSCD
关联资源
相关文章
相关作者
相关机构
京公网安备11010802024621