Cited by 159MRI in cancer diagnosisOvarian cancer diagnosis and treatmentUltrasound Imaging and Elastography

Diagnostic accuracy of diffusion‐weighted imaging in differentiating benign from malignant ovarian lesions

Open access
Fujii, Shinya, Kakite, Suguru, Nishihara, Keisuke, Kanasaki, Yoshiko, Harada, Tasuku, Kigawa, Junzo, Kaminou, Toshio, Ogawa, Toshihide·2008·Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Abstract

Purpose: To clarify the diagnostic accuracy of diffusion‐weighted imaging (DWI) in differentiating benign from malignant ovarian lesions. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively analyzed magnetic resonance images of 123 ovarian lesions in 119 patients. We defined lesions with abnormal signal intensity as malignancy and assessed the location of abnormal intensity within the lesions on DWI. We also assessed the mean and lowest apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values of the solid portion for each ovarian lesion. Results: The majority of malignant ovarian tumors and mature cystic teratomas, and almost half of the endometriomas, showed abnormal signal intensity on DWI, whereas most fibromas and other benign lesions did not. The main locations of abnormal signal intensity were solid portions in malignant ovarian tumors, cystic components suggestive of keratinoid substances and Rokitansky protuberance in mature cystic teratomas, and intracystic clots in endometriomas. On DW imaging, receiver‐operating characteristic analysis yielded mean Az values of 0.703. There was no significant difference in mean and lowest ADC values between malignant and benign lesions. Conclusion: DWI of ovarian lesions and ADC values of the solid component are not useful for differentiating benign from malignant ovarian lesions. This knowledge is essential in avoiding misinterpretation in the diagnosis of ovarian lesions. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2008;28:1149–1156. © 2008 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/jmri.21575

Cites

31 of 31 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Intracystic blood clots floating in or attached to the wall of endometrial cysts showed a mean ADC value of 1.11 × 10-3/mm2/s.

    “Intracystic blood clots floating in or attached to the wall of endometrial cysts showed a mean value of 1.11 × 10–3/mm2/s [22].”

    From Appearance of abdominal wall endometriosis on MR imaging (2010) · cites this paper as [22]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Moteki T, Ishizaka H. Diffusion-weighted EPI of cystic ovarian le- sions: evaluation of cystic contents using apparent diffusion coef- ficients. J Magn Reson Imaging 2000;12:1014 -1019.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Fujii, S., Kakite, S., Nishihara, K., Kanasaki, Y., Harada, T., Kigawa, J., Kaminou, T., & Ogawa, T.
Affiliations
Tottori University (JP)
Corresponding author
Fujii, Shinya
Venue
Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2008-10-28
Volume
28
Issue
5
Pages
1149-1156
ISSN
  • 1053-1807 (ISSN-L)
  • 1522-2586
OpenAlex
W2047280450
Cited by
159
References
31
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 13 · 2013: 13 · 2012: 15
FWCI
7.42
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › MRI in cancer diagnosis
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Reproductive Medicine › Ovarian cancer diagnosis and treatment
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Ultrasound Imaging and Elastography
Keywords
diffusion-weighted imaging, ovarian lesions, benign versus malignant differentiation, apparent diffusion coefficient, dermoid cyst, endometrioma, ovarian fibroma, diagnostic accuracy
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Algorithms, Diagnosis, Differential, Female, Humans, Image Enhancement, Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted, Middle Aged, Ovarian Neoplasms, Sensitivity and Specificity, Reproducibility of Results, Diffusion Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review