We have located links that may give you full text access.
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Diffusion kurtosis imaging for differentiating borderline from malignant epithelial ovarian tumors: A correlation with Ki-67 expression.
Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging : JMRI 2017 November
PURPOSE: To investigate the use of diffusion kurtosis imaging (DKI) in differentiating borderline from malignant epithelial ovarian tumors (MEOTs) and to correlate DKI parameters with Ki-67 expression.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty-two consecutive patients with epithelial ovarian tumors (17 borderline epithelial ovarian tumors, BEOTs; 35 MEOTs) were prospectively evaluated using DKI with b values of 0, 500, 1000, 1500, 2000, and 2500 s/mm2 and standard diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) with b values of 0 and 1000 s/mm2 using a 1.5T magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) unit. The kurtosis (K) and diffusion coefficient (D) from DKI and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) from standard DWI were measured, compared, and correlated with Ki-67 expression between the two groups. Statistical analyses were performed using the Mann-Whitney U-test, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, and Spearman's correlation.
RESULTS: The K value was significantly lower in BEOTs than in MEOTs (0.55 ± 0.09 vs. 0.9 ± 0.2), while the D and ADC values were significantly higher in BEOTs than in MEOTs (2.27 ± 0.35 vs. 1.39 ± 0.37 and 1.72 ± 0.36 vs. 1.1 ± 0.25, respectively) (P < 0.001). For differentiating between BEOTs and MEOTs, the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were 88.2%, 94.3%, and 92.3% for K value; 88.2%, 91.4%, and 90.4% for D value; and 88.2%, 88.6%, and 88.5% for ADC value, respectively. However, there were no differences in the diagnostic performances among the three parameters above (K vs. ADC, P = 0.203; D vs. ADC, P = 0.148; K vs. D, P = 0.904). The K value was positively correlated with Ki-67 expression (r = 0.699), while the D and ADC values were negatively correlated with Ki-67 expression (r = -0.680, -0.665, respectively).
CONCLUSION: Preliminary findings demonstrate that DKI is an alternative tool for differentiating BEOTs from MEOTs, and is correlated with Ki-67 expression. However, no added value is found for DKI compared with standard DWI.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 1 Technical Efficacy: Stage 2 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2017;46:1499-1506.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty-two consecutive patients with epithelial ovarian tumors (17 borderline epithelial ovarian tumors, BEOTs; 35 MEOTs) were prospectively evaluated using DKI with b values of 0, 500, 1000, 1500, 2000, and 2500 s/mm2 and standard diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) with b values of 0 and 1000 s/mm2 using a 1.5T magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) unit. The kurtosis (K) and diffusion coefficient (D) from DKI and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) from standard DWI were measured, compared, and correlated with Ki-67 expression between the two groups. Statistical analyses were performed using the Mann-Whitney U-test, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, and Spearman's correlation.
RESULTS: The K value was significantly lower in BEOTs than in MEOTs (0.55 ± 0.09 vs. 0.9 ± 0.2), while the D and ADC values were significantly higher in BEOTs than in MEOTs (2.27 ± 0.35 vs. 1.39 ± 0.37 and 1.72 ± 0.36 vs. 1.1 ± 0.25, respectively) (P < 0.001). For differentiating between BEOTs and MEOTs, the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were 88.2%, 94.3%, and 92.3% for K value; 88.2%, 91.4%, and 90.4% for D value; and 88.2%, 88.6%, and 88.5% for ADC value, respectively. However, there were no differences in the diagnostic performances among the three parameters above (K vs. ADC, P = 0.203; D vs. ADC, P = 0.148; K vs. D, P = 0.904). The K value was positively correlated with Ki-67 expression (r = 0.699), while the D and ADC values were negatively correlated with Ki-67 expression (r = -0.680, -0.665, respectively).
CONCLUSION: Preliminary findings demonstrate that DKI is an alternative tool for differentiating BEOTs from MEOTs, and is correlated with Ki-67 expression. However, no added value is found for DKI compared with standard DWI.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 1 Technical Efficacy: Stage 2 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2017;46:1499-1506.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices 
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app