
浏览全部资源
扫码关注微信
400042 重庆,陆军军医大学(第三军医大学)大坪医院放射科
[张伟国,E-mail: wgzhang01@163.com ZHANG Weiguo, E-mail: wgzhang01@163.com
收稿:2021-06-06,
修回:2021-07-07,
纸质出版:2021-12-15
移动端阅览
陈鹏, 康厚艺, 张乐天, 等. 磁共振动态对比增强不同后处理模型在脑胶质瘤分级中的应用[J]. 第三军医大学学报, 2021,43(23):2577-2583.
Peng CHEN, Houyi KANG, Letian ZHANG, et al. Application of different post-processing modes of dynamic contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging in glioma grading[J]. Journal of Third Military Medical University, 2021, 43(23): 2577-2583.
陈鹏, 康厚艺, 张乐天, 等. 磁共振动态对比增强不同后处理模型在脑胶质瘤分级中的应用[J]. 第三军医大学学报, 2021,43(23):2577-2583. DOI: 10.16016/j.1000-5404.202106043.
Peng CHEN, Houyi KANG, Letian ZHANG, et al. Application of different post-processing modes of dynamic contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging in glioma grading[J]. Journal of Third Military Medical University, 2021, 43(23): 2577-2583. DOI: 10.16016/j.1000-5404.202106043.
目的
2
探讨磁共振动态对比增强(dynamic contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging,DCE-MRI) 的不同后处理模型[Tissue-4D和Omni-Kinetics(OK)软件]在鉴别脑胶质瘤不同级别中的价值。
方法
2
收集本院2013年1月至2019年7月共89例经术后病理证实的胶质瘤患者
其中Ⅱ级29例、Ⅲ级24例、Ⅳ级36例。患者均于术前行DCE-MRI检查,分别用Tissue-4D及OK后处理软件获得相应参数值。运用单因素方差分析比较不同级别胶质瘤参数差异,Spearman等级相关分析不同参数与胶质瘤分级的相关性,受试者工作特征(receiver operating characteristic,ROC)曲线分析各参数的曲线下面积(area under the curve,AUC)。
结果
2
两种后处理模型热点分析的Ktrans值、Tissue-4D的iAUC值和OK的Vp值在不同级别胶质瘤间差异均有统计学意义(
P
<
0.05),Ⅳ级胶质瘤的Kep值低于Ⅱ级(
P
<
0.05),Ⅳ级和Ⅲ级胶质瘤的Ve值高于Ⅱ级(
P
<
0.05)。Ktrans参数AUC值为0.949(Ⅱ级
vs
Ⅳ级,
P
<
0.01),诊断效能最高。Ktrans(OK)与胶质瘤级别之间相关性最强(
r
=0.775,
P
<
0.01)。OK软件直方图参数,Ktrans值的第50百分位数(50th),Ve值的平均值、第75百分位数(75th)、第90百分位数(90th)
Kep值的平均值、熵、50th及Vp值的平均值在鉴别Ⅱ级与Ⅲ级、Ⅱ级与Ⅳ级间差异均具有统计学意义(
P
<
0.05),Vp值的能量、熵、50th、75th、90th及Kep值的能量,在鉴别Ⅱ级与Ⅳ级、Ⅲ级与Ⅳ级间的差异均具有统计学意义(
P
<
0.05)。
结论
2
两种模型热点分析的Ktrans值及Ve值对胶质瘤分级均有较高的诊断效能,OK软件中直方图分析较热点分析参数更丰富、更全面。
Objective
2
To explore the diagnostic values of different post-processing modes of dynamic contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI) in the differentiation of glioma grade.
Methods
2
A total of 89 patients with glioma confirmed by postoperative pathology in our hospital from January 2013 to July 2019 were enrolled
including 29 patients of gradeⅡ
24 of grade Ⅲ and 36 of grade Ⅳ. All patients underwent preoperative DCE-MRI examination
and corresponding parameters were collected and processed using post-processing software Tissue-4D and Omni-Kinetics (OK) respectively. One-way ANOVA was adopted to compare the differences of the obtained parameters among glioma of different grades. Spearman rank correlation analysis was performed to analyze the correlation between each parameter and glioma grade
and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was used to evaluate the area under the curve (AUC) of each parameter.
Results
2
In hot spot analysis
the Ktrans values of both post-processing modes
as well as the iAUC value of Tissue-4D and the Vp value of OK were all significantly different among glioma of different grades (
P
<
0.05). The Kep value of grade Ⅳ glioma was obviously lower than that of grade Ⅱ glioma (
P
<
0.05)
while the Ve values of grade Ⅳ and Ⅲ tumors were notably higher than that of gradeⅡ one (
P
<
0.05).
The AUC value of Ktrans (Tissue-4D) was 0.949 in the differentiation of gradeⅡ from grade Ⅳ glioma (
P
<
0.01)
indicating the highest diagnostic efficiency
and the correlation between Ktrans (OK) and glioma grade was the highest (
r
=0.775
P
<
0.01). In the histogram analysis of OK
the 50th percentile of Ktrans value
the mean and the 75th and 90th percentiles of Ve value
the mean
entropy and the 50th percentile of Kep value
as well as the mean value of Vp showed significances in the differentiation of grade Ⅱ from grade Ⅲ and grade Ⅱ from grade Ⅳ glioma (
P
<
0.05). Moreover
the energy
entropy and 50th
75th
90th percentiles of Vp value
and the energy of Kep value were statistically different in the identification of grade Ⅳ from grade Ⅱ and grade Ⅳ from grade Ⅲ (
P
<
0.05).
Conclusion
2
The Ktrans and Ve values of the 2 post-processing modes have rather high diagnostic efficiency for glioma grading in the hotspot analysis
and the histogram analysis of OK software involves more abundant and comprehensive parameters.
OIKE T, SUZUKI Y, SUGAWARA K, et al . Radiotherapy plus concomitant adjuvant temozolomide for glioblastoma: Japanese mono-institutional results[J ] . P LoS ONE, 2013, 8(11): e78943. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0078943.
ZHANG J F, LIU H, TONG H P, et al . Clinical applications of contrast-enhanced perfusion MRI techniques in gliomas: recent advances and current challenges[J ] . Contrast Media Mol Imaging, 2017, 2017: 7064120. DOI: 10.1155/2017/7064120.
YAN L F, SUN Y Z, ZHAO S S, et al . Perfusion, diffusion, or brain tumor barrier integrity: which represents the glioma features best?[J ] . Cancer Manag Res, 2019, 12(11): 9989-10000. DOI: 10.2147/CMAR.S197839.
SENGUPTA A, AGARWAL S, GUPTA P K, et al . On differentiation between vasogenic edema and non-enhancing tumor in high-grade glioma patients using a support vector machine classifier based upon pre and post-surgery MRI images[J ] . Eur J Radiol, 2018, 9(106): 199-208. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2018.07.018.
KHALIFA F, SOLIMAN A, EL-BAZ A, et al . Models and methods for analyzing DCE-MRI: a review[J ] . Med Phys, 2014, 41(12): 124301. DOI: 10.1118/1.4898202.
ZHANG J L, RUSINEK H, BOKACHEVA L, et al . Use of cardiac output to improve measurement of input functi on in quantitative dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI[J ] . J Magn Reson Imaging, 2009, 30(3): 656-665. DOI: 10.1002/jmri.21891.
JIN Y, PENG H, PENG J. Brain glioma localization diagnosis based on magnetic resonance imaging[J]. World Neurosurg, 2021, 149: 325-332. DOI: 10.1016/j.wneu.2020.09.113.
ZHANG H X, SUN Z Q, CHENG Y G, et al . A pilot study of radiomics technology based on X-ray mammography in patients with triple-negative breast cancer[J ] . J Xray Sci Technol, 2019, 27(3): 485-492. DOI: 10.3233/XST-180488.
黄杰, 李晓光, 康厚艺, 等. DSC-MRI和DCE-MRI定量分析在脑胶质瘤分级诊断中的应用[J]. 第三军医大学学报, 2015, 37(7): 672-677. DOI: 10.16016/j.1000-5404.201410173.
HUANG J, LI X G, KANG H Y, et al . Dynamic contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging and dynamic susceptibility contrast magnetic resonance imaging in grading of glioma[J ] . J Third Mil Med Univ, 2015, 37(7): 672-677. DOI: 10.16016/j.1000-5404.201410173.
关婷婷, 王小宜, 侯磊, 等. DCE-MRI与脑胶质瘤级别及VEGF关系的研究[J]. 临床放射学杂志, 2018, 37(12): 1973-1979. DOI: 10.13437/j.cnki.jcr.2018.12.006.
GUAN T T, WANG X Y, HOU L, et al . Study on the relationship between DCE-MRI and glioma grade, as well as between DCE-MRI and VEGF expressio n[J ] . J Clin Radiol, 2018, 37(12): 1973-1979. DOI: 10.13437/j.cnki.jcr.2018.12.006.
ABRIGO J M, FOUNTAIN D M, PROVENZALE J M, et al . Magnetic resonance perfusion for differentiating low-grade from high-grade gliomas at first presentation[J ] . Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 2018, 1(1): CD011551. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011551.pub2
YOU S H, CHOI S H, KIM T M, et al . Differentiation of high-grade from low-grade astrocytoma: improvement in diagnostic accuracy and reliability of pharmacokinetic parameters from DCE MR imaging by using arterial input functions obtained from DSC MR imaging[J ] . Radiology, 2018, 286(3): 981-991. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2017170764.
ZHAO M, GUO L L, HUANG N, et al . Quantitative analysis of permeability for glioma grading using dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging[J ] . Oncol Lett, 2017, 14(5): 5418-5426. DOI: 10.3892/ol.2017.6895.
LEE J Y, AHN K J, LEE Y S, et al . Differentiation of grade Ⅱ and Ⅲ oligodendrogliomas from grade Ⅱ and Ⅲ astrocytomas: a histogram analysis of perfusion parameters derived from dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) and dynamic susceptibility contrast (DSC) MRI[J ] . Acta Radiol, 2018, 59(6): 723-731. DOI: 10.1177/0284185117728981.
SENGUPTA A, GUPTA R K, SINGH A. Evaluation of B 1 inhomogeneity effect on DCE-MRI data analysis of brain tumor patients at 3T[J ] . J Transl Med, 2017, 15(1): 242. DOI: 10.1186/s12967-017-1349-7.
BRENDLE C, HEMPEL J M, SCHITTENHELM J, et al . Glioma grading and determination of IDH mutation status and ATRX loss by DCE and ASL perfusion[J ] . Clin Neuroradiol, 2018, 28(3): 421-428. DOI: 10.1007/s00062-017-0590-z.
SANTAROSA C, CASTELLANO A, CONTE G M, et al . Dynamic contrast-enhanced and dynamic susceptibility contrast perfusion MR imaging for glioma grading: Preliminary comparison of vessel compartment and permeability parameters using hotspot and histogram analysis[J ] . Eur J Radiol, 2016, 85(6): 1147-1156. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2016.03.020.
FALK A, FAHLSTRÖM M, ROSTRUP E, et al . Discrimination between glioma grades Ⅱ and Ⅲ in suspected low-grade gliomas using dynamic contrast-enhanced and dynamic susceptibility contrast perfusion MR imaging: a histogram analysis approach[J ] . Neuroradiology, 2014, 56(12): 1031-1038. DOI: 10.1007/s00234-014-1426-z.
HU Y, ZHANG N, YU M H, et al . Volume-based histogr am analysis of dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI for estimation of gliomas IDH1 mutation status[J ] . Eur J Radiol, 2020, 131: 109247. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2020.109247.
HU Y, CHEN Y, WANG J, et al . Non-invasive estimation of glioma IDH1 mutationand VEGF expression by histogram analysis of dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI[J ] . Front Oncol, 2020, 10: 593102. DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2020.593102.
ZHANG H W, LYU G W, HE W J, et al . Differential diagnosis of central lymphoma and high-grade glioma: dynamic contrast-enhanced histogram[J ] . Acta Radiol, 2020, 61(9): 1221-1227. DOI: 10.1177/0284185119896519.
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