Comparison of T1 mapping and fixed T1 method for dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI perfusion in brain gliomas.
Brain
Glioma
Magnetic resonance imaging
Perfusion imaging
Journal
European radiology
ISSN: 1432-1084
Titre abrégé: Eur Radiol
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 9114774
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Jul 2019
Jul 2019
Historique:
received:
09
10
2018
accepted:
22
02
2019
revised:
14
01
2019
pubmed:
12
4
2019
medline:
27
8
2019
entrez:
12
4
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
To compare dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI (DCE-MRI) data obtained using different prebolus T1 values in glioma grading and molecular profiling. We retrospectively reviewed 83 cases of gliomas: 46 lower-grade gliomas (LGG; grades II and III) and 37 high-grade gliomas (HGG; grade IV). DCE-MRI maps of plasma volume fraction (Vp), extravascular-extracellular volume fraction (Ve), and tracer transfer constant from plasma to tissue (K Perfusion parameters obtained with the fixed T1 value were significantly higher than those obtained with the VFA. As regards diagnostic accuracy, there were no significant differences between the two methods both for glioma grading and molecular classification, except for few parameters of both methods. DCE-MRI data obtained with different prebolus T1 are not comparable and the definition of a prebolus T1 by T1 mapping is not mandatory since it does not improve the diagnostic accuracy of DCE-MRI. • DCE-MRI data obtained with different prebolus T1 are significantly different, thus not comparable. • The definition of a prebolus T1 by T1 mapping is not mandatory since it does not improve the diagnostic accuracy of DCE-MRI for glioma grading. • The use of a fixed T1 value represents a valid alternative to T1 mapping for DCE-MRI analysis.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30972545
doi: 10.1007/s00330-019-06122-x
pii: 10.1007/s00330-019-06122-x
doi:
Substances chimiques
Contrast Media
0
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
3467-3479Références
Magn Reson Med. 2008 Aug;60(2):496-501
pubmed: 18666108
J Magn Reson Imaging. 2015 Jul;42(1):97-104
pubmed: 25350816
Springerplus. 2015 Feb 24;4:88
pubmed: 25793147
Magn Reson Med. 2006 Mar;55(3):524-31
pubmed: 16453314
Magn Reson Med. 2015 Feb;73(2):514-22
pubmed: 24578189
J Magn Reson Imaging. 2003 Nov;18(5):575-84
pubmed: 14579401
Eur Radiol. 2017 Aug;27(8):3156-3166
pubmed: 27975145
Neuroradiology. 2015 Jun;57(6):561-72
pubmed: 25744200
Radiology. 2018 Jun;287(3):933-943
pubmed: 29361245
Med Phys. 2005 Jun;32(6):1524-8
pubmed: 16013709
J Magn Reson Imaging. 1999 Sep;10(3):223-32
pubmed: 10508281
Magn Reson Imaging. 1999 Oct;17(8):1163-71
pubmed: 10499678
Neuro Oncol. 2018 Mar 27;20(4):567-575
pubmed: 29016814
Neuro Oncol. 2014 Oct;16 Suppl 7:vii12-23
pubmed: 25313234
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2015 Nov;36(11):2017-22
pubmed: 26228886
Neuroimage. 2016 Jan 15;125:446-455
pubmed: 26477653
Neuroradiology. 2016 Dec;58(12):1197-1208
pubmed: 27796446
J Transl Med. 2017 Dec 02;15(1):242
pubmed: 29197390
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2017 Dec;38(12):2243-2250
pubmed: 29074633
Br J Radiol. 2011 Dec;84 Spec No 2:S112-20
pubmed: 22433822
Magn Reson Imaging. 1987;5(3):201-8
pubmed: 3626789
Radiol Med. 2017 Apr;122(4):294-302
pubmed: 28070841
Acta Neuropathol. 2016 Jun;131(6):803-20
pubmed: 27157931