Cited by 560MRI in cancer diagnosisHepatocellular Carcinoma Treatment and PrognosisAdvanced MRI Techniques and Applications

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Focal Liver Lesion Detection and Characterization with Diffusion-weighted MR Imaging: Comparison with Standard Breath-hold T2-weighted Imaging

Abstract

PURPOSE: To retrospectively compare diffusion-weighted (DW) magnetic resonance (MR) imaging with standard breath-hold T2-weighted MR imaging for focal liver lesion (FLL) detection and characterization, by using consensus evaluation and other findings as the reference standard. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Approval for this retrospective HIPAA-compliant study was obtained from the institutional review board; informed consent was waived. Fifty-three consecutive patients (30 men, 23 women; mean age, 60.7 years) with at least one FLL of 1 cm or greater in diameter were evaluated. Two independent observers reviewed DW (b values of 0, 50, and 500 sec/mm(2)) and T2-weighted images for FLL detection and characterization. Reference standard for diagnosis was obtained from consensus review by the two observers of DW, T2-weighted, and dynamic contrast material-enhanced images, pathologic data, and follow-up imaging results. Apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) was measured for FLLs identified at consensus review. DW and T2-weighted images were compared for FLL detection and characterization by using a binary logistic regression model. Receiver operating characteristic curve analyses were conducted to evaluate the utility of ADC for diagnosis of malignancy. RESULTS: Two hundred eleven FLLs (136 malignant, 75 benign) were detected at consensus review. Overall detection rate (averaged for two observers) was significantly higher for DW (87.7%) versus T2-weighted (70.1%) imaging (P < .001). FLL characterization was not significantly different between DW (89.1%) and T2-weighted (86.8%) imaging (P = .51). ADCs of malignant FLLs were significantly lower than those of benign FLLs (P < .001). The area under the curve for diagnosis of malignancy was 0.839, with sensitivity of 74.2%, specificity of 77.3%, positive predictive value of 85.5%, negative predictive value of 62.3%, and accuracy of 75.3%, by using a threshold ADC of less than 1.60 x 10(-3) mm(2)/sec. CONCLUSION: DW MR imaging was better than standard breath-hold T2-weighted imaging for FLL detection and was equal to breath-hold T2-weighted imaging for FLL characterization.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1148/radiol.2463070432

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Diffusion-weighted imaging may help to distinguish well-differentiated hepatocellular carcinomas from benign nodules.

    “Diffusion-weighted imaging may help to distinguish well-differentiated hepatocellular carcinomas from benign nodules [17,18], C Dionisi Vici and L Monti unpublished.”

    From Recommendations for the management of tyrosinaemia type 1 (2013) · cites this paper as [18]

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 54

  1. 10.1001/archsurg.1997.01430290051008 · DOI
  2. 10.1056/NEJM199603143341104 · DOI
  3. 10.1001/archsurg.136.3.318 · DOI
  4. 10.1053/jhep.2003.50047 · DOI
  5. 10.1016/S1064-9689(03)00048-5 · DOI
  6. 10.1016/S1064-9689(03)00047-3 · DOI
  7. 10.1016/S1064-9689(03)00046-1 · DOI
  8. 10.1148/radiology.190.2.8284402 · DOI
  9. 10.1002/jmri.1880050214 · DOI
  10. 10.1148/radiology.204.3.9280252 · DOI
  11. 10.2214/ajr.170.2.9456953 · DOI
  12. 10.1007/s002619900539 · DOI
  13. 10.1148/radiology.210.3.r99fe17617 · DOI
  14. 10.2214/ajr.173.2.10430143 · DOI
  15. 10.1148/radiol.2261011904 · DOI
  16. 10.2214/AJR.05.0778 · DOI
  17. 10.1002/jmri.20682 · DOI
  18. 10.1097/00004728-199805000-00005 · DOI
  19. 10.1002/jmri.10430 · DOI
  20. 10.1148/radiol.2383041384 · DOI
  21. 10.1002/jmri.20864 · DOI
  22. 10.1002/jmri.20269 · DOI
  23. 10.1016/j.mri.2005.07.002 · DOI
  24. 10.2214/ajr.183.3.1830677 · DOI
  25. 10.1148/radiology.194.2.7824723 · DOI
  26. 10.2214/ajr.166.5.8615254 · DOI
  27. 10.1007/s002619900372 · DOI
  28. 10.1002/(SICI)1522-2586(199901)9:1<87::AID-JMRI12>3.0.CO;2-5 · DOI
  29. 10.1002/jmri.1205 · DOI
  30. 10.1148/radiol.2233011011 · DOI
  31. 10.2214/ajr.184.3.01840842 · DOI
  32. 10.1016/j.clinimag.2006.02.006 · DOI
  33. 10.1148/radiology.192.2.8029404 · DOI
  34. 10.1148/rg.241035050 · DOI
  35. 10.1148/radiology.201.1.8816545 · DOI
  36. 10.1148/radiology.219.2.r01ma40445 · DOI
  37. 10.2214/ajr.181.3.1810809 · DOI
  38. 10.1148/radiology.184.3.1509052 · DOI
  39. 10.1148/radiology.193.2.7972769 · DOI
  40. 10.1007/s00261-001-0140-6 · DOI
  41. Bartolozzi C, Lencioni R, Caramella D, Palla A, Bassi AM, Di Candio G. Small hepatocellular carcinoma: detection with US, CT, MR imaging DSA, and Lipiodol-CT.Acta Radiol1996;37:69–74. · DOI
  42. 10.1097/00004728-200007000-00022 · DOI
  43. 10.2307/2529786 · DOI · Paper page
  44. 10.1148/radiology.183.3.1316622 · DOI
  45. 10.1148/radiology.184.3.1324509 · DOI
  46. 10.1148/radiology.186.3.8430191 · DOI
  47. 10.2214/ajr.168.5.9129411 · DOI
  48. 10.1002/(SICI)1522-2586(199902)9:2<266::AID-JMRI17>3.0.CO;2-7 · DOI
  49. 10.1148/radiol.2303020921 · DOI
  50. 10.1148/radiol.2392050551 · DOI
  51. 10.1148/radiology.188.1.8511317 · DOI
  52. 10.1002/jmri.1055 · DOI
  53. 10.1148/radiology.218.1.r01ja4047 · DOI
  54. Krinsky GA, Lee VS, Nguyen MT, et al.Siderotic nodules at MR imaging: regenerative or dysplastic? J Comput Assist Tomogr2000;24:773–776. · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

  • Recommendations for the management of tyrosinaemia type 1

    de Laet, C., Dionisi-Vici, C., Leonard, J. V., McKiernan, P., Mitchell, G., Monti, L., de Baulny, H. O., Pintos-Morell, G., & Spiekerkötter, U. (2013) · Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases · doi:10.1186/1750-1172-8-8 · Cited by 227

    “Diffusion-weighted imaging may help to distinguish well-differentiated hepatocellular carcinomas from benign nodules [17,18], C Dionisi Vici and L Monti unpublished.”
    Background

Metadata

Authors
Parikh, T., Drew, S. J., Lee, V. S., Wong, S., Hecht, E. M., Babb, J. S., & Taouli, B.
Affiliations
  • NYU Langone Health (US)
  • New York University (US)
Venue
Radiology
Published
2008-03
Volume
246
Issue
3
Pages
812-822
ISSN
  • 0033-8419 (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-1315
OpenAlex
W2106989370
Cited by
560
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 17 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 18 · 2018: 24 · 2017: 28 · 2016: 45 · 2015: 36 · 2014: 54 · 2013: 69 · 2012: 45
FWCI
35.18
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Radiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › MRI in cancer diagnosis
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Hepatology › Hepatocellular Carcinoma Treatment and Prognosis
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Advanced MRI Techniques and Applications
Keywords
focal liver lesions, diffusion-weighted imaging, apparent diffusion coefficient, T2-weighted imaging, liver lesion detection, liver lesion characterization, benign versus malignant liver lesions, breath-hold imaging
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Contrast Media, Female, Humans, Liver Neoplasms, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Middle Aged, Predictive Value of Tests, Retrospective Studies, ROC Curve, Chi-Square Distribution, Logistic Models, Gadolinium DTPA, Diffusion Magnetic Resonance Imaging

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