Utility Of apparent diffusion coefficients in the evaluation of solid renal tumors at 3T

Magnetic Resonance in Medical Sciences

Volumn 13, Issue 2, 2014, Pages 89-95

  Sasamori, Hiroto ^a   Saiki, Makoto ^a   Suyama, Jumpei ^a   Ohgiya, Yoshimitsu ^a   Hirose, Masanori ^a   Gokan, Takehiko ^a  

^a SHOWA UNIVERSITY   (Japan)

Author keywords

3T; Apparent diffusion coefficients; Diffusion weighted MRI; Renal tumor

Indexed keywords

CONTRAST MEDIUM; GADODIAMIDE; GADOLINIUM; GADOLINIUM PENTETATE; GADOTERIDOL; HETEROCYCLIC COMPOUND; ORGANOMETALLIC COMPOUND;

ADULT; AGED; ANGIOMYOLIPOMA; BIOPSY; DIAGNOSTIC USE; DIFFUSION WEIGHTED IMAGING; FEMALE; HUMAN; KIDNEY CARCINOMA; KIDNEY TUMOR; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PATHOLOGY; PROCEDURES; REPRODUCIBILITY; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY;

ADULT; AGED; ANGIOMYOLIPOMA; BIOPSY; CARCINOMA, RENAL CELL; CONTRAST MEDIA; DIFFUSION MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; FEMALE; GADOLINIUM; GADOLINIUM DTPA; HETEROCYCLIC COMPOUNDS; HUMANS; KIDNEY NEOPLASMS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; ORGANOMETALLIC COMPOUNDS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES;

EID: 84903216814     PISSN: 13473182     EISSN: 18802206     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2463/mrms.2013-0038     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Lane BR, Aydin H, Danforth TL, et al. Clinical correlates of renal angiomyolipoma subtypes in 209 patients: classic, fat poor, tuberous sclerosis associated and epithelioid. J Urol 2008; 180:836-843.
2. Israel GM, Bosniak MA. Renal imaging for diagnosis and staging of renal cell carcinoma. Urol Clin North Am 2003; 30:499-514.
3. Semelka RC, Hricak H, Stevens SK, Finegold R, Tomei E, Carroll PR. Combined gadolinium-enhanced and fat-saturation MR imaging of renal masses. Radiology 1991; 178:803-809.
4. Rominger MB, Kenney PJ, Morgan DE, Bernreuter WK, Listinsky JJ. Gadolinium-enhanced MR imaging of renal masses. Radiographics 1992; 12:1097-1116.
5. Ho VB, Allen SF, Hood MN, Choyke PL. Renal masses: quantitative assessment of enhancement with dynamic MR imaging. Radiology 2002; 224: 695-700.
6. Hecht EM, Israel GM, Krinsky GA, et al. Renal masses: quantitative analysis of enhancement with signal intensity measurements versus qualitative analysis of enhancement with image subtraction for diagnosing malignancy at MR imaging. Radiology 2004; 232:373-378.
7. Jinzaki M, Tanimoto A, Narimatu Y, et al. Angio-myolipoma: imaging findings in lesions with minimal fat. Radiology 1997; 205:497-502.
8. Kim JK, Kim SH, Jang YJ, et al. Renal angiomyoli-poma with minimal fat: differentiation from other neoplasms at double-echo chemical shift FLASH MR imaging. Radiology 2006; 239:174-180.
9. Kutikov A, Fossett LK, Ramchandani P, et al. Incidence of benign pathologic findings at partial neph-rectomy for solitary renal mass presumed to be renal cell carcinoma on preoperative imaging. Urology 2006; 68:737-740.
10. Marszalek M, Ponholzer A, Brössner C, Wachter J, Maier U, Madersbacher S. Elective open nephron-sparing surgery for renal masses: single-center experience with 129 consecutive patients. Urology 2004; 64:38-42.
11. McKiernan J, Yossepowitch O, Kattan MW, et al. Partial nephrectomy for renal cortical tumors: pathologic findings and impact on outcome. Urology 2002; 60:1003-1009.
12. Pahernik S, Roos F, Hampel C, Gillitzer R, Melchior SW, Thuroff JW. Nephron sparing surgery for renal cell carcinoma with normal contralateral kidney: 25 years of experience. J Urol 2006; 175:2027-2031.
13. Snyder ME, Bach A, Kattan MW, Raj GV, Reuter VE, Russo P. Incidence of benign lesions for clinically localized renal masses smaller than 7 cm in radiological diameter: influence of sex. J Urol 2006; 176(6 Pt 1):2391-2395.
14. Jinzaki M, Tanimoto A, Mukai M, et al. Double-phase helical CT of small renal parenchymal neoplasms: correlation with pathologic findings and tumor angiogenesis. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2000; 24:835-842.
15. Sandrasegaran K, Sundaram CP, Ramaswamy R, et al. Usefulness of diffusion-weighted imaging in the evaluation of renal masses. AJR Am J Roent-genol 2010; 194:438-445.
16. Paudyal B, Paudyal P, Tsushima Y, et al. The role of the ADC value in the characterisation of renal carcinoma by diffusion-weighted MRI. Br J Radiol 2010; 83:336-343.
17. Rosenkrantz AB, Niver BE, Fitzgerald BE, Babb JS, Chandarana H, Melamed J. Utility of the apparent diffusion coefficient for distinguishing clear cell renal cell carcinoma of low and high nuclear grade. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2010; 195:W344-W351.
18. Razek AA, Farouk A, Mousa A, Nabil N. Role of diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging in characterization of renal tumors. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2011; 35:332-336.
19. Doǧanay S, Kocakoç E, Ciçekçi M, Aǧlamiş S, Akpolat N, Orhan I. Ability and utility of diffusion-weighted MRI with different b values in the evaluation of benign and malignant renal lesions. Clin Radiol 2011; 66:420-425.
20. Tanaka H, Yoshida S, Fujii Y, et al. Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging in the differentiation of angiomyolipoma with minimal fat from clear cell renal cell carcinoma. Int J Urol 2011; 18: 727-730.
21. Wang H, Cheng L, Zhang X, et al. Renal cell carcinoma: diffusion-weighted MR imaging for subtype differentiation at 3.0T. Radiology 2010; 257:135-143.
22. Yu X, Lin M, Ouyang H, Zhou C, Zhang H. Application of ADC measurement in characterization of renal cell carcinomas with different pathological types and grades by 3.0T diffusion-weighted MRI. Eur J Radiol 2012; 81:3061-3066.
23. Gauvain KM, McKinstry RC, Mukherjee P, et al. Evaluating pediatric brain tumor cellularity with dif-fusion-tensor imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2001; 177:449-454.
24. Guo AC, Cummings TJ, Dash RC, Provenzale JM. Lymphomas and high-grade astrocytomas: comparison of water diffusibility and histologic characteristics. Radiology 2002; 224:177-183.
25. Koh DM, Collins DJ. Diffusion-weighted MRI in the body: applications and challenges in oncology. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2007; 188:1622-1635.
26. Milner J, McNeil B, Alioto J, et al. Fat poor renal angiomyolipoma: patient, computerized tomography and histological findings. J Urol 2006; 176:905-909.
27. Taouli B, Thakur RK, Mannelli L, et al. Renal lesions: characterization with diffusion-weighted imaging versus contrast-enhanced MR imaging. Radiology 2009; 251:398-407.
28. Jinzaki M, Silverman SG, Tanimoto A, Shinmoto H, Kuribayashi S. Angiomyolipomas that do not contain fat attenuation at unenhanced CT. Radiology 2005; 234:311 author reply 311-312.
29. Dale BM, Braithwaite AC, Boll DT, Merkle EM. Field strength and diffusion encoding technique affect the apparent diffusion coefficient measurements in diffusion-weighted imaging of the abdomen. Invest Radiol 2010; 45:104-108.
30. Huisman TA, Loenneker T, Barta G, et al. Quantitative diffusion tensor MR imaging of the brain: field strength related variance of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) and fractional anisotropy (FA) scalars. Eur Radiol 2006; 16:1651-1658.
31. Rosenkrantz AB, Oei M, Babb JS, Niver BE, Taouli B. Diffusion-weighted imaging of the abdomen at 3.0 tesla: Imaging quality and apparent diffusion coefficient reproducibility compared with 1.5 tesla. J Magn Reson Imaging 2011; 33:128-135.
32. Girometti R, Furlan A, Esposito G, et al. Relevance of b-values in evaluating liver fibrosis: a study in healthy and cirrhotic subjects using two single-shot spin-echo echo-planar diffusion-weighted sequences. J Magn Reson Imaging 2008; 28:411-419.
33. Coenegrachts K, Delanote J, Ter Beek L, et al. Evaluation of true diffusion, perfusion factor, and apparent diffusion coefficient in non-necrotic liver meta-stases and uncomplicated liver hemangiomas using black-blood echo planar imaging. Eur J Radiol 2009; 69:131-138.
34. Luciani A, Vignaud A, Cavet M, et al. Liver cirrhosis: intravoxel incoherent motion MR imaging-pilot study. Radiology 2008; 249:891-899.
35. Yamada I, Aung W, Himeno Y, Nakagawa T, Shibuya H. Diffusion coefficients in abdominal organs and hepatic lesions: evaluation with intravoxel incoherent motion echo-planar MR imaging. Radiology 1999; 210:617-623.