Histogram analysis from stretched exponential model on diffusion-weighted imaging: evaluation of clinically significant prostate cancer.

Clicks: 349
ID: 75910
2020
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Steady

Ranked #5 of 13 articles by views in The British Journal of Radiology

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
To evaluate the usefulness of histogram analysis of stretched exponential model (SEM) on diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) in evaluating clinically significant prostate cancer (CSC).A total of 85 patients with prostate cancer underwent 3 T multiparametric MRI, followed by radical prostatectomy. Histogram parameters of the tumor from the SEM (distributed diffusion coefficient [DDC] and α) and the monoexponential model (MEM; apparent diffusion coefficient [ADC]) were evaluated. The associations between parameters and Gleason score (GS) or Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) v2 were evaluated. The area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC) was calculated to evaluate diagnostic performance of parameters in predicting CSC.The values of histogram parameters of DDC and ADC were significantly lower in patients with CSC than in patients without CSC ( < 0.05), except for skewness and kurtosis. The value of the 25 percentile of α was significantly lower in patients with CSC than in patients without CSC ( = 0.014). Histogram parameters of ADC and DDC had significant weak to moderate negative associations with Gleason score (GS) or PI-RADS v2 ( < 0.001), except for skewness and kurtosis. For predicting CSC, the AUCs of mean ADC (0.856), 50 percentile DDC (0.852), and 25 percentile α (0.707) yielded the highest values compared to other histogram parameters from each group.Histogram analysis of the SEM on DWI may be a useful quantitative tool for evaluating CSC. However, the SEM did not outperform the MEM.Histogram parameters of SEM may be useful for evaluating CSC.
Reference Key
kim2020histogramthe Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Kim, EunJu;Kim, Chan Kyo;Kim, Hyun Soo;Jang, Dong Pyo;Kim, In Young;Hwang, Jinwoo;
Journal The British Journal of Radiology
Year 2020
DOI
10.1259/bjr.20190757
URL
Keywords

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.