Grading of Gliomas by Using Monoexponential, Biexponential, and Stretched Exponential Diffusion-weighted MR Imaging and Diffusion Kurtosis MR Imaging
Journal Articles
Overview
Research
Identity
Additional Document Info
View All
Overview
abstract
PURPOSE: To quantitatively compare the potential of various diffusion parameters obtained from monoexponential, biexponential, and stretched exponential diffusion-weighted imaging models and diffusion kurtosis imaging in the grading of gliomas. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study was approved by the local ethics committee, and written informed consent was obtained from all subjects. Both diffusion-weighted imaging and diffusion kurtosis imaging were performed in 69 patients with pathologically proven gliomas by using a 3-T magnetic resonance (MR) imaging unit. An isotropic apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC), true ADC, pseudo-ADC, and perfusion fraction were calculated from diffusion-weighted images by using a biexponential model. A water molecular diffusion heterogeneity index and distributed diffusion coefficient were calculated from diffusion-weighted images by using a stretched exponential model. Mean diffusivity, fractional anisotropy, and mean kurtosis were calculated from diffusion kurtosis images. All values were compared between high-grade and low-grade gliomas by using a Mann-Whitney U test. Receiver operating characteristic and Spearman rank correlation analysis were used for statistical evaluations. RESULTS: ADC, true ADC, perfusion fraction, water molecular diffusion heterogeneity index, distributed diffusion coefficient, and mean diffusivity values were significantly lower in high-grade gliomas than in low-grade gliomas (U = 109, 56, 129, 6, 206, and 229, respectively; P < .05). Pseudo-ADC and mean kurtosis values were significantly higher in high-grade gliomas than in low-grade gliomas (U = 98 and 8, respectively; P < .05). Both water molecular diffusion heterogeneity index (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUC] = 0.993) and mean kurtosis (AUC = 0.991) had significantly greater AUC values than ADC (AUC = 0.866), mean diffusivity (AUC = 0.722), and fractional anisotropy (AUC = 0.500) in the differentiation of low-grade and high-grade gliomas (P < .05). CONCLUSION: Water molecular diffusion heterogeneity index and mean kurtosis values may provide additional information and improve the grading of gliomas compared with conventional diffusion parameters.
