Comparison of 3.0-and 1.5-tesla diffusion-weighted imaging in the visibility of breast cancer

“…Lo et al were able to visualize all 31 breast lesions on DWI scans at 3T (14). Matsuoka et al compared the ADC and lesion visibility between 1.5 and 3T in 16 breast lesions (22). They found no difference in ADC between 1.5 and 3T.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Quantitative diffusion weighted imaging for differentiation of benign and malignant breast lesions: The influence of the choice of b‐values

Peters

Vincken

Bosch

et al. 2010

Magnetic Resonance Imaging

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Higher magnetic field strength can be used to increase the signal-tonoise ratio and spatial resolution to achieve better visibility for lesions smaller than 10 mm (8). Improvement in visibility facilitates ROI definition within lesion margins and better identification of high signal intensity areas, which results in lower ADC variability and therefore, higher reproducibility of measurements.…”

Section: Roi Demarcation Methods In Imaging Of Breast Lesions • 125mentioning

confidence: 99%

Region of interest demarcation for quantification of the apparent diffusion coefficient in breast lesions and its interobserver variability

Nogueira

Brandão

Matos³

et al. 2015

Diagn Interv Radiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ORIGINAL ARTICLEPURPOSE We aimed to compare two different methods of region of interest (ROI) demarcation and determine interobserver variability on apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) in breast lesions. METHODSThirty-two patients with 39 lesions were evaluated with a 3.0 Tesla scanner using a diffusion-weighted sequence with several b-values. Two observers independently performed the ADC measurements using: 1) a small fixed area of 10 mm 2 ROI within the area with highest restriction; 2) a large ROI so as to include the whole lesion. Differences were assessed using the Wilcoxon-rank test. Bland-Altman method and Spearman coefficient were applied for interobserver variability and correlation analysis.RESULTS ADC values measured using the two ROI demarcation methods were significantly different for both observers (P = 0.026; P = 0.033). There was no interobserver variability in ADC values using either method (large ROI, P = 0.21; small ROI, P = 0.64). ADC values of malignant lesions were significantly different between the two methods (P < 0.001). Variability in ADC was ≤0.008×10 -3 mm 2 /s for both methods. When using the same method, ADC values were significantly correlated between the observers (small ROI: r=0.990, P < 0.001; large ROI: r=0.985, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONThe choice of ROI demarcation method influences ADC measurements. Small ROIs show less overlap in ADC values and higher ADC reproducibility, suggesting that this method may improve lesion discrimination. Interobserver variability was low for both methods. Diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) of the breast has been used to improve lesion diagnosis. However, due to lesion heterogeneity, differences between acquisition protocols, and lesion demarcation strategies, there is some overlap in apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values of different lesion types (1).Regarding lesion demarcation, different strategies can be found in the literature. Pereira et al. (2) suggest delimiting the whole lesion area, whereas others consider only its most solid part representing viable tumor (3, 4).A study focusing on the use of ADC minimum, average, and maximum to characterize breast lesions (5) has indirectly investigated the influence of region of interest (ROI) on ADC quantification, but has not specifically compared these two methods of demarcation. Here, we compare these two ROI demarcation methods and determine their interobserver variability in ADC quantification. Methods Study populationDuring a five-month period, 38 women with clinical indications to perform breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) were studied following approval from the Ethics Committee (code number 276/13).Exclusion criteria were breast surgery within six months, chemotherapy or radiotherapy within 24 months, no lesions in dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) image, breast implants, and examinations presenting artefacts. Only lesions ≥7 mm in the DCE having histological results or a minimum two-year follow-up were included. MRI data acquisitionPatients underwent examinations at 3.0 T system (Mag...

show abstract

“…While some investigators have suggested that higher quality DWI and ADC maps are achieved with a b value of 850 s/mm 2 (10), others have concluded that high b values (e.g., 1,500) result in better image contrast between various malignant breast lesions, ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), and benign lesions (11,12). Previous reports also suggest a higher lesion conspicuity for breast MRI using a 3.0-T magnetic field strength (B0) when compared to using a 1.5-T field strength (13). However, it is not clear whether 3.0 T would have a significant effect on the diagnostic performance of DWI in differentiating malignant from benign breast lesions.…”

Section: Original Articlementioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of magnetic field strength and b value on the sensitivity and specificity of quantitative breast diffusion-weighted MRI

Eghtedari

Fox

et al. 2016

Quant. Imaging Med. Surg.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background:To evaluate the effect of b value or the magnetic field strength (B0) on the sensitivity and specificity of quantitative breast diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI). Conclusions: Better sensitivity is achieved with DWI of b value =1,000 than with b value =1,500.However, b value and B0 do not significantly impact diagnostic performance of DWI when using appropriate thresholds.Keywords: Breast MRI; diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI); b value; magnetic field strength; benign and malignant lesions

show abstract

Comparison of 3.0-and 1.5-tesla diffusion-weighted imaging in the visibility of breast cancer

Abstract: Small cancers were more clearly visible on DWI at 3.0 T than 1.5 T.

Cited by 104 publications

References 16 publications

Quantitative diffusion weighted imaging for differentiation of benign and malignant breast lesions: The influence of the choice of b‐values

Quantitative diffusion weighted imaging for differentiation of benign and malignant breast lesions: The influence of the choice of b‐values

Region of interest demarcation for quantification of the apparent diffusion coefficient in breast lesions and its interobserver variability

Effects of magnetic field strength and b value on the sensitivity and specificity of quantitative breast diffusion-weighted MRI

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About