Intravoxel incoherent motion (IVIM) in evaluation of breast lesions:Comparison with conventional DWI

European Journal of Radiology

Volumn 82, Issue 12, 2013, Pages

  Liu, Chunling ^a,b   Liang, Changhong ^a   Liu, Zaiyi ^a   Zhang, Shuixing ^a   Huang, Biao ^a  

^a GUANGDONG PROVINCIAL PEOPLE'S HOSPITAL   (China)

^b SOUTHERN MEDICAL UNIVERSITY   (China)

Author keywords

Apparent diffusion coefficient; Biexpoential signal attenuation; Breast neoplasma; Diffusion weighted imaging; Intravoxel incoherent motion; Magnetic resonance imaging

Indexed keywords

GADOLINIUM PENTETATE MEGLUMINE;

ADULT; AGED; APPARENT DIFFUSION COEFFICIENT; AREA UNDER THE CURVE; ARTICLE; BREAST LESION; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC TEST ACCURACY STUDY; DIFFUSION COEFFICIENT; DIFFUSION WEIGHTED IMAGING; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; INTRAVOXEL INCOHERENT MOTION; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALIGNANT NEOPLASTIC DISEASE; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE SCANNER; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

APPARENT DIFFUSION COEFFICIENT; BIEXPOENTIAL SIGNAL ATTENUATION; BREAST NEOPLASMA; DIFFUSION-WEIGHTED IMAGING; INTRAVOXEL INCOHERENT MOTION; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING;

ADULT; AGED; ALGORITHMS; ARTIFACTS; BREAST NEOPLASMS; DIFFUSION MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; FEMALE; HUMANS; IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; IMAGE INTERPRETATION, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; IMAGING, THREE-DIMENSIONAL; MIDDLE AGED; MOTION; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84890796544     PISSN: 0720048X     EISSN: 18727727     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2013.08.006     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Aberle DR, Chiles C, Gatsonis C, et al. Imaging and cancer: research strat-egy of the American College of Radiology Imaging Network. Radiology2005;235(3):741-51.
2. Leung JWT. Screening mammography reduces morbidity of breast cancer treat-ment. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2005;184(5):1508-9.
3. Duffy SW, Smith RA, Gabe R, et al. Screening for breast cancer. Surg Oncol ClinN Am 2005;14(4):671-97.
4. Peters NHGM, Borel Rinkes IHM, Zuithoff NPA, et al. Meta-Analysis of MR imag-ing in the diagnosis of breast lesions. Radiology 2008;246(1):116-24.
5. Kuhl CK. Concepts for differential diagnosis in breast MR imaging. Magn ResonImaging Clin N Am 2006;14(3):305-28.
6. Kul S, Cansu A, Alhan E, et al. Contribution of diffusion-weighted imaging todynamic contrast-enhanced MRI in the characterization of breast tumors. AJRAm J Roentgenol 2011;196(1):210-7.
7. Partridge SC, Demartini WB, Kurland BF, et al. Differential diagnosis of mam-mographically and clinically occult breast lesions on diffusion-weighted MRI.J Magn Reson Imaging JMRI 2010;31(3):562-70.
8. Ei Khouli RH, Jacobs MA, Mezban SD, et al. Diffusion-weighted imagingimproves the diagnostic accuracy of conventional 3.0-T breast MR imaging.Radiology 2010;256(1):64-73.
9. Hirano M, Satake H, Ishigaki S, et al. Diffusion-weighted imaging of breastmasses: comparison of diagnostic performance using various apparent diffu-sion coefficient parameters. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2012;198(3):717-22.
10. Woodhams R, Matsunaga K, Iwabuchi K, et al. Diffusion-weighted imaging ofmalignant breast tumors: the usefulness of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC)value and ADC map for the detection of malignant breast tumors and evaluationof cancer extension. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2005;29(5):644-9.
11. Yabuuchi H, Matsuo Y, Okafuji T, et al. Enhanced mass on contrast-enhancedbreast MR imaging: Lesion characterization using combination of dynamiccontrast-enhanced and diffusion-weighted MR images. J Magn Reson ImagingJMRI 2008;28(5):1157-65.
12. Yabuuchi H, Matsuo Y, Kamitani T, et al. Non-mass-like enhancement oncontrast-enhanced breast MR imaging: lesion characterization using combi-nation of dynamic contrast-enhanced and diffusion-weighted MR images. EurJ Radiol 2010;75(1):e126-32.
13. Rubesova E, Grell A-S, De Maertelaer V, et al. Quantitative diffusion imag-ing in breast cancer: a clinical prospective study. J Magn Reson Imaging JMRI2006;24(2):319-24.
14. Marini C, Iacconi C, Giannelli M, et al. Quantitative diffusion-weightedMR imaging in the differential diagnosis of breast lesion. Eur Radiol2007;17(10):2646-55.
15. Chen X, Li W, Zhang Y, et al. Meta-Analysis of quantitative diffusion-weightedMR imaging in the differential diagnosis of breast lesions. BMC Cancer2010;10:693.
16. Mazaheri Y, Afaq A, Rowe DB, et al. Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonanceimaging of the prostate: improved robustness with stretched exponential mod-eling. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2012;36(6):695-703.
17. Le Bihan D, Breton E, Lallemand D, et al. MR imaging of intravoxel incoher-ent motions: application to diffusion and perfusion in neurologic disorders.Radiology 1986;161(2):401-7.
18. Andreou A, Koh DM, Collins DJ, et al. Measurement reproducibility of perfusionfraction and pseudodiffusion coefficient derived by intravoxel incoherentmotion diffusion-weighted MR imaging in normal liver and metastases. EurRadiol 2013;23(2):428-34.
19. Sumi M, Van Cauteren M, Sumi T, et al. Salivary gland tumors: use ofintravoxel incoherent motion MR imaging for assessment of diffusion andperfusion for the differentiation of benign from malignant tumors. Radiology2012;263(3):770-7.
20. Eckerbom P, Hansell P, Bjerner T, et al. Intravoxel incoherent motion MR imag-ing of the kidney: pilot study. Adv Exp Med Biol 2013;765:55-8.
21. Sigmund EE, Cho GY, Kim S, et al. Intravoxel incoherent motion imag-ing of tumor microenvironment in locally advanced breast cancer. MagnReson Med Off J Soc Magn Reson Med Soc Magn Reson Med 2011;65(5):1437-47.
22. Le Bihan D, Turner R, MacFall JR. Effects of intravoxel incoherent motions (IVIM)in steady-state free precession (SSFP) imaging: application to molecular diffu-sion imaging. Magn Reson Med Off J Soc Magn Reson Med Soc Magn Reson Med1989;10(3):324-37.
23. Pang Y, Turkbey B, Bernardo M, et al. Intravoxel incoherent motion MR imagingfor prostate cancer: an evaluation of perfusion fraction and diffusion coefficientderived from different b-value combinations. Magn Reson Med Off J Soc MagnReson Med Soc Magn Reson Med 2013;69(2):553-62.
24. Delille J-P, Slanetz PJ, Yeh ED, Kopans DB, Garrido L. Breast cancer: regionalblood flow and blood volume measured with magnetic susceptibility- basedMR imaging-initial results. Radiology 2002;223(2):558-65.
25. Jansen SA, Lin VC, Giger ML, et al. Normal parenchymal enhancementpatterns in women undergoing MR screening of the breast. Eur Radiol2011;21(7):1374-82.
26. DeMartini WB, Liu F, Peacock S, et al. Background parenchymal enhance-ment on breast MRI: impact on diagnostic performance. AJR Am J Roentgenol2012;198(4):W373-80.
27. Tamura T, Usui S, Murakami S, et al. Biexponential signal attenuation analysisof diffusion-weighted imaging of breast. Magn Reson Med Sci MRMS Off J JpnSoc Magn Reson Med 2010;9(4):195-207.
28. Baron P, Dorrius MD, Kappert P, Oudkerk M, Sijens PE. Diffusion-weightedimaging of normal fibroglandular breast tissue: influence of microperfusionand fat suppression technique on the apparent diffusion coefficient. NMRBiomed 2010;23(4):399-405.
29. Le Bihan D, Breton E, Lallemand D, et al. Separation of diffusion and per-fusion in intravoxel incoherent motion MR imaging. Radiology 1988;168(2):497-505.
30. Chandarana H, Lee VS, Hecht E, Taouli B, Sigmund EE. Comparison of biexponen-Tial and monoexponential model of diffusion weighted imaging in evaluationof renal lesions: preliminary experience. Invest Radiol 2011;46(5):285-91.