ZUSAMMENFASSUNG Ziel Direkter Vergleich verschiedener Methoden zur besserenErkennung und Differenzierbarkeit von Prostatakrebs in der diffusionsgewichteten Bildgebung (DWI); Vergleich der Ergebnisse mit originalen DWI-Bildern und konventionellen Apparent Diffusion Coefficient (ADC)-Karten. This document was downloaded for personal use only. Unauthorized distribution is strictly prohibited. dataset exponential ADC maps (eADC), computed DWI images (cDWI), and additionally eADC maps for computed b-values of 2000 and 3000 s/mm² were generated (c_eADC). For each of 123 lesions, the contrast (CR) and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) were determined. Differences in the CR and CNR of malignant lesions (n = 83) between the different image types and group differences between benign (n = 40), lowrisk (n = 53) and high-risk (n = 30) lesions were assessed by repeated measures ANOVA and one-way ANOVA with post-hoc tests. The ability to differentiate between benign and malignant and between low-risk and high-risk lesions was assessed by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analyses.
Material und MethodenResults The CR and CNR were higher for computed DWI and related c_eADC at b = 3000 s/mm² and 2000 s/mm² compared to original DWI, conventional ADC and standard eADC. For differentiation of benign and malignant lesions, conventional ADC and CR of conventional ADC were best suited. For discrimination of low-risk from high-risk lesions, the CR of c_eADC was best suited followed by the CR of cDWI. Fortschr Röntgenstr 2018; 190: 758-766