分享:
分享到微信朋友圈
X
子宫疾病MRI专题
小视野扩散加权成像在宫颈癌中的临床价值
邓保娣 李震 胡道予 王艳春 吴思思

Cite this article as: Deng BD, Li Z, Hu DY, et al. Clinical value of reduced field-of-view diffusion-weighted imaging in cervical cancer. Chin J Magn Reson Imaging, 2020, 11(7): 487-492.本文引用格式:邓保娣,李震,胡道予,等.小视野扩散加权成像在宫颈癌中的临床价值.磁共振成像, 2020, 11(7): 487-492. DOI:10.12015/issn.1674-8034.2020.07.002.


[摘要] 目的 对比常规视野扩散加权成像(full field-of-view diffusion-weighted imaging,f-FOV DWI),探讨小视野扩散加权成像(reduced field-of-view diffusion-weighted imaging ,r-FOV DWI)在宫颈癌中的临床价值。材料与方法 回顾性分析2015年6月至2017年1月间行妇科盆腔磁共振检查的252例患者资料,将其中病检和磁共振检查双阳性的50例患者纳入宫颈癌组,另收集磁共振检查上宫颈未见异常且宫颈刮片阴性的40例患者纳入宫颈正常组。病人术前均行常规MRI、r-FOV DWI及f-FOV DWI扫描,由2名影像诊断医师采用双盲法分别对宫颈癌组50例病例的两组DWI图像的解剖细节显示、磁敏感伪影、几何变形、总体诊断信心进行主观评价,分别测量并计算宫颈癌组的两种DWI图像的信噪比(signal noise ratio,SNR)和对比噪声比(carrier to noise ratio ,CNR)以进行客观评价,同时分析比较r-FOV DWI宫颈癌组和正常组的ADC值。结果 2名诊断医师对宫颈癌组两种视野DWI图像的主观评分及客观测量结果的一致性良好(均满足ICC值>0.7)。两种DWI图像在解剖细节显示、磁敏感伪影、几何变形及总体诊断信心四项主观评分上分别为:r-FOV DWI组2.82±0.85 ,2.88±0.75 ,2.86±0.78,2.82±0.83 ;f-FOV DWI组2.04±0.70,1.96±0.61 ,2.06±0.62 ,2.16±0.71。r-FOV DWI图像的各项主观评分均高于f-FOV DWI,且各项评分对比P值均满足P<0.05,差异具有统计学意义。两组DWI图像在SNR、CNR的比较上无明显差异。r-FOV DWI测得的宫颈癌组ADC值为(117.05±20.43) ×10-5 mm/s2,正常组的ADC为(143.80±27.79)×10-5 mm/s2,宫颈癌组ADC值均低于正常组,两者间差异具有显著性。结论 在宫颈癌DWI检查中,r-FOV DWI可以有效减少图像的变形、伪影以获得较常规f-FOV DWI更高的图像质量和更佳的病变显示效果,通过ADC值的测量可以更好地区分宫颈癌和正常宫颈。
[Abstract] Objective: To compare the clinical efficacy of reduced field-of-view (r-FOV) diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) in cervical cancer with full field-of-view (f-FOV) DWI.Materials and Methods: The data of 252 patients who underwent gynecological pelvic magnetic resonance examination from June 2015 to January 2017 were retrospectively analyzed. Fifty patients who were both positive for medical examination and magnetic resonance examination were included in the cervical cancer group. Resonance examination of 40 patients with no abnormal cervical cervix and negative cervical scraping were included in the normal cervical group. Patients underwent conventional MRI, r-FOV DWI, and f-FOV DWI scans before surgery. Two imaging diagnostic physicians used double-blind methods to display anatomical details and magnetic sensitivity of the two groups of DWI images of 50 cases of cervical cancer. The subjective evaluation of shadow, geometric deformation, and overall diagnostic confidence were performed. The signal noise ratio (SNR) and carrier to noise ratio (CNR) of the two DWI images of the cervical cancer group were measured and calculated for objective evaluation, and the ADC values of the cervical cancer group and the normal group were analyzed and compared on r-FOV DWI.Results: The subjective scores and objective measurements of the two field DWI images of the cervical cancer group by the two diagnostic doctors were in good agreement (both ICC values> 0.7). The two subjective scores of anatomical details, magnetically sensitive artifacts, geometric deformation, and overall diagnostic confidence of the two DWI images are: r-FOV DWI group 2.82±0.85, 2.88±0.75, 2.86±0.78, 2.82±0.83; f-FOV DWI group 2.04±0.70, 1.96±0.61, 2.06±0.62, 2.16±0.71. The subjective scores of r-FOV DWI images were higher than those of f-FOV DWI, and the P-values of each score were P<0.05. The difference was statistically significant. There was no significant difference in the SNR and CNR between the two groups of DWI images. The ADC value of cervical cancer group measured by r-FOV DWI was lower than the normal group, and the difference between the two was significant.Conclusions: In cervical cancer DWI examination, r-FOV DWI can effectively reduce image distortion and artifacts to obtain higher image quality and better lesion display effect than conventional f-FOV DWI. The measurement of ADC value can be more effective Make a good distinction between cervical cancer and normal cervix.
[关键词] 磁共振成像;子宫颈肿瘤;弥散加权成像;表观扩散系数;鉴别诊断
[Keywords] magnetic resonance imaging;uterine cervical neoplasms;diffusion-weighted imaging;apparent diffusion coefficient;differential diagnosis

邓保娣 华中科技大学同济医学院附属同济医院放射科,武汉 430030

李震 华中科技大学同济医学院附属同济医院放射科,武汉 430030

胡道予 华中科技大学同济医学院附属同济医院放射科,武汉 430030

王艳春 华中科技大学同济医学院附属同济医院放射科,武汉 430030

吴思思* 华中科技大学同济医学院附属同济医院放射科,武汉 430030

通信作者:吴思思,E-mail :514868394@qq.com

利益冲突:无。


基金项目: 国家自然科学基金 编号:81771801
收稿日期:2019-12-26
接受日期:2020-05-21
中图分类号:R445.2; R737.33 
文献标识码:A
DOI: 10.12015/issn.1674-8034.2020.07.002
本文引用格式:邓保娣,李震,胡道予,等.小视野扩散加权成像在宫颈癌中的临床价值.磁共振成像, 2020, 11(7): 487-492. DOI:10.12015/issn.1674-8034.2020.07.002.

       宫颈癌是临床最常见的女性恶性肿瘤之一,其发病率近年来也逐渐年轻化[1]。对宫颈癌进行早期诊断和临床分期,对于提高患者的生存质量和生存率具有重要的临床意义,MRI是目前临床上对于宫颈疾病诊断和分期的重要手段,显著提升了临床疗效[2]

       磁共振弥散加权成像(diffusion-weighted imaging,DWI)作为一种无创的功能成像方法,可以检测活体组织内水分子的扩散运动[3],已经成为临床上常规磁共振诊断中的重要组成部分。目前临床上DWI最常用的还是单次激发平面回波成像(single-shot echo-planar imaging,SS-EPI)序列,但是其图像易受肠道气体及呼吸运动伪影的影响,容易产生比较严重的伪影、图像变形和失真等问题[4,5,6,7],尤其是在高场强情况下,从而影响病变检出及观察。随着磁共振技术的不断进展,小视野DWI (reduced field-of-view DWI,r-FOV DWI)利用二维选择性激励射频(two-dimensional radio frequency ,2DRF)技术仅激发小范围兴趣区,可以有效地去除伪影,获得较高质量和分辨率的DWI图像[8],本研究试图比较宫颈癌患者的f-FOV DWI和r-FOV DWI的图像质量及宫颈癌患者和正常组患者r-FOV DWI图像的ADC值,以评估r-FOV DWI对宫颈癌的诊断性能和临床价值。

1 材料与方法

1.1 临床资料

       回顾性分析2015年6月至2017年1月间在我院行妇科盆腔磁共振检查的252例患者资料,将其中满足以下所有条件:(1)均经手术或诊刮病理证实为宫颈癌患者,病理类型包含宫颈鳞状细胞癌和腺癌;(2)均未行放化疗治疗;(3) MRI能显示可辨病灶的50例患者纳入宫颈癌组。宫颈癌组的患者年龄为37~61岁,平均年龄(49.52±9.63)岁。另收集磁共振检查结果上宫颈未见异常且宫颈刮片结果为阴性的40例患者纳入宫颈正常组。正常组患者年龄为29~80岁,平均年龄为(45.65±11.25)岁。所有患者检查前均知情并已签署知情同意书。

1.2 检查方法

       若有金属节育环的,要在MRI检查前提前取出。受检者MRI检查前2 h饮水1000 ml,憋尿,使膀胱中度充盈。使用GE Discovery 750 3.0 T磁共振扫描仪,采用TORSO线圈,患者取仰卧位,足先进,成像范围包括整个盆腔。所有患者均行常规T1WI、T2WI、单次SS-EPI、f-FOV DWI及r-FOV DWI序列扫描,所有DWI序列的扫描都以病灶为中心,b值取0 s/mm2和800 s/mm2,扩散方向为ALL ,NEX为8,带宽±250 kHz。f-FOV DWI成像参数:TR 4000 ms,TE 59.5 ms,视野35 cm×35 cm,矩阵192×160,层厚4 mm,层间距1 mm;r-FOV DWI成像参数:TR 4000 ms,TE 55.3 ms,视野24 cm×10 cm,矩阵128×96,层厚4 mm,层间距1 mm,每个扩散序列扫描时间约2 min左右。

1.3 图像分析

1.3.1 主观评价

       选取宫颈癌组患者的r-FOV DWI和f-FOV DWI序列b值=800 s/mm2图像,分别由2名具有5年以上腹部影像诊断经验的放射科医师隐去患者资料后在各自的工作站上行双盲法评价。以横断面T2WI为参考,采用四分法对图像解剖细节显示、磁敏感伪影、几何变形及总体诊断信心进行评分。评分标准[9]表1

表1  主观评价评分标准
Tab. 1  Scoring criteria for subjective evaluation

1.3.2 客观评价

       相同的2名医师在ADW4.6工作站上对隐去患者资料后宫颈癌组的两组b值=800 s/mm2的DWI图像上采用双盲法进行所需值的测量。测量内容包括宫颈病灶区、臀大肌信号强度、图像背景的标准偏差值(在盆腔外宫颈位置相同的相位编码方向上选取),三者ROI大小分别为0.44~1.56 cm2、0.96~1.12 cm2、0.97~ 1.14 cm2。每次测量选取三个ROI后取均值,ROI选取避开坏死、出血、囊变区。宫颈的信号强度为SIroi,臀大肌信号强度为SImuscle,背景信号强度标准差为SDnoise。按下列公式计算SNR、CNR。

1.3.3 ADC值的测量

       ADC的值=Ln (SI/S0)/(b0-b1),其中SI为b值= 800 s/mm2时的信号强度,S0为b值=0 s/mm2时的信号强度。采用圆形感兴趣区ROI,在宫颈癌组的r-FOV DWI b值=800 s/mm2的DWI图像上手动选取感兴趣区,选取病灶最大层面画ROI,尽量包全肿瘤组织,且尽量避免坏死区域,ROI大小为0.45~1.61 cm2,测量三次后取均值,从而计算获得肿瘤组织的ADC值;另外选取正常组r-FOV DWI b值=800 s/mm2的DWI图像上宫颈部,范围从宫颈外口至宫颈内口,从而获得正常宫颈的ADC值(图1)。

图1  正常组ADC测量示意图。图A为上下范围,图B为ROI选取示意图,测量三次后取均值
图2  49岁女性,子宫颈中-低分化鳞状细胞癌患者。图A为术后病理图,图B为横断位T2WI图,图C为b值=800 s/mm2的f-FOV DWI图,图D为b值=800 s/mm2的r-FOV DWI图,白色箭头所示r-FOV DWI图比f-FOV DWI图细节显示更加清晰,磁敏感伪影低,变形少
图3  52岁女性,子宫颈中-低分化鳞状细胞癌患者。图A为术后病理图,图B为f-FOV DWI图,图C为r-FOV DWI图,如白色箭头所示r-FOV DWI图病灶内细节显示更佳,空间分辨率更高
图4  女,45岁,子宫颈中分化鳞状细胞癌。图A为术后病理图,图B为f-FOV DWI图,图C为r-FOV DWI图。图B白色箭头所示半月形高信号伪影,而图C示r-FOV DWI图伪影抑制效果良好
Fig. 1  Schematic diagram of ADC measurement in the normal group. Figure A shows the upper and lower ranges, and Figure B shows the ROI selection diagram. The average value is taken after three measurements.
Fig. 2  Forty-nine years old woman with cervical squamous cell carcinoma. Figure A is the postoperative pathological picture, Figure B is the transverse T2WI picture, Figure C is the f-FOV DWI picture with b value=800 s/mm2, and Picture D is the r-FOV DWI picture with b value=800 s/mm2. The r-FOV DWI image shown by the white arrow is more detailed than the f-FOV DWI image, with less magnetically sensitive artifacts and less distortion.
Fig. 3  Fifty-two years old female patient with cervical moderately to poorly differentiated squamous cell carcinoma. Figure A is the postoperative pathological picture, Figure B is the f-FOV DWI picture, and Figure C is the r-FOV DWI picture. As shown by the white arrow, the r-FOV DWI picture shows better details and higher spatial resolution.
Fig. 4  Forty-five years old female patient with differentiated squamous cell carcinoma in the cervix. Figure A is the postoperative pathological picture, Figure B is the f-FOV DWI picture, and Figure C is the r-FOV DWI picture. Half-moon-shaped high-signal artifacts can be seen at the junction of the cervix and the gas inside the cervix as shown by the white arrows in Fig. B, while the artifact suppression effect of the C r-FOV DWI picture is good.

1.4 统计学分析

       应用SPSS 20.0统计学软件进行数据处理。正常组和宫颈癌组的年龄采用独立样本t检验,对比两组病例在年龄上是否存在统计学差异。利用一致性检验(intraclass correlation coefficient test,ICC)分别评估2名医师在主观评分、客观评分上的一致性,组内相关系数值在0.81~1.00之间认为一致性极好,0.61~0.80认为一致性良好,0.41~0.60认为一致性中等,0.21~0.4l认为一致性较差,ICC值<0.20认为两者之间不一致。宫颈癌组r-FOV DWI与f-FOV DWI图像质量的主观评分及客观评分[对比噪声比(carrier to noise ratio ,CNR)和信噪比(signal noise ratio ,SNR)]采用配对样本t检验来比较各参数值的差异,以P<0.05为差异具有统计学意义。并采用独立样本t检验分析宫颈癌组和正常组r-FOV DWI图像ADC值的差异性,以P<0.05为差异具有统计学意义。

2 结果

2.1 正常组和宫颈癌组患者的年龄对比分析

       将两组患者的年龄采用独立样本t检验,检验结果如表2,两组患者的年龄对比t=-1.758,P=0.082,满足P>0.05,说明两组患者在年龄上不存在统计学差异,可以进行比对。

表2  两组患者年龄对比分析(岁)
Tab. 2  Comparative analysis of the age of the two groups of patients (year)

2.2 宫颈癌组2名诊断医师在主观评价上的一致性分析

       2名医师在宫颈癌组r-FOV DWI和f-FOV DWI的主观评分上一致性分别为:r-FOV DWI组图像解剖细节显示ICC=0.925,磁敏感伪影ICC=0.818,几何变形ICC=0.825,诊断信心ICC=0.905;f-FOV DWI组图像解剖细节显示ICC=0.883,磁敏感伪影ICC=0.864,几何变形ICC=0.883,诊断信心ICC=0.768 ,2名诊断医师在宫颈癌的两组DWI图像各项评估项目上ICC值均高于0.75,说明两名医师在两组DWI图像上的主观评分一致性良好。2名诊断医师评分一致的选取一致评分,评分不一致的经讨论后取得一致意见,进行后续评价(表3)。

表3  宫颈癌组2名诊断医师主观评价一致性分析
Tab. 3  Consistent analysis of subjective evaluation by two diagnostic physicians in cervical cancer group

2.3 宫颈癌组2名诊断医师客观测量值的一致性分析

       2名医师在宫颈癌组r-FOV DWI和f-FOV DWI的客观测量上一致性分别为:r-FOV DWI组图像S病灶ICC=0.784 ,S臀大肌ICC=0.841 ,SD背景ICC=0.788,ADC宫颈癌ICC=0.752 ,ADC正常宫颈ICC=0.771 ;f-FOV DWI组图像S病灶ICC=0.719 ,S臀大肌ICC=0.804 ,SD背景ICC=0.895。2名诊断医师在两组DWI图像上的测量数据一致性对比ICC值均大于0.7,说明2名诊断医师的客观测量数据一致性良好。两名诊断医师测量结果取二者均值,进行后续评价。具体如表4

表4  宫颈癌组2名诊断医师客观测量值的一致性分析
Tab. 4  Consistency analysis of objective measurements by two diagnostic physicians in the cervical cancer group

2.4 图像质量的分析

       r-FOV DWI图像的主观评分解剖细节显示2.82± 0.85,磁敏感伪影2.88±0.75,几何变形2.86±0.78,总体诊断信心2.82±0.83;f-FOV DWI图像主观评分解剖细节显示2.04±0.70,磁敏感伪影1.96±0.61,几何变形2.06±0.62,总体诊断信心2.16±0.71。r-FOV DWI图像的主观评分均高于f-FOV DWI,且各项评分对比P值均满足P<0.05,差异具有统计学意义。客观评价上,两组SNR、CNR值均无明显差异,且P>0.05,说明差异不具有统计学意义(表5)。典型宫颈癌MRI表现见图2图3图4

表5  主观评分与客观评价(SNR、CNR)的结果(±s)
Tab. 5  Results of subjective evaluation and objective evaluation (SNR, CNR)(±s)

2.5 ADC值的分析

       r-FOV DWI测得的宫颈癌组ADC值为(117.05± 20.43)×10-5 mm/s2,正常组的ADC为(143.80±27.79)×10-5 mm/s2,宫颈癌组ADC值均低于正常组,且P< 0.05,两者间差异具有统计学意义。

3 讨论

       DWI是MRI扫描的常用序列,目前已广泛应用于包括宫颈癌在内的盆腔MRI检查中[10]。但由于常规盆腔DWI成像(f-FOV)的视野较大,一方面呼吸运动、肠道蠕动等可能会带来运动伪影,另一方面肠道内的气液体、骨盆骨骼等与周围组织交界又会引起因bo场不均造成的磁敏感伪影及图像变形,目前3.0 T高场强磁共振的大规模使用更一步突出这些不利影响[11,12],这使得常规的DWI图像逐渐难以满足日常的诊断需求。

       磁共振新技术r-FOV DWI选用了一种全新的射频进行激励,它可以进行2D选择性激励,只对感兴趣取进行激发,不被FOV外的信号干扰,由于扫描范围小,频率编码相对短,这也减轻了因连续梯度磁场切换积累的相位位移造成的图像变形以及宫颈同宫颈周围气液交界处磁场不均匀所造成的磁敏感伪影[11],从而能得到高分辨率且伪影少的DWI图像。这种新技术的应用,可以在一定程度上弥补常规DWI的不足。本研究中,r-FOV DWI与f-FOV DWI图像主观评价方面,图像解剖细节显示、磁敏感伪影、几何变形及总体诊断信心上所得的各项主观评分r-FOV DWI均高于常规DWI,这表明r-FOV DWI序列对比f-FOV DWI序列,其图像分辨率明显提高,有效的抑制了图像的磁敏感伪影以及失真、变形等情况,对于病变显示更清晰,增强了诊断信心。有学者在胆囊、肾脏、乳腺癌和直肠癌患者MRI检查中也使用了r-FOV DWI技术,得到了相同的结论[13,14,15,16]

       客观评价中r-FOV对比f-FOV组图像,SNR稍低,但是两组图像的SNR、CNR均无显著性差异(P > 0.05)。这可能与图像信噪比的影响因素有关,在信噪比的影响参数中,尤以体素的大小、采集平均次数、重复时间、回波时间最为突出[17]。FOV的大小与图像的SNR具有负相关性,FOV减小,SNR降低。增大体素可以增大SNR,但是会使图像的细节显示减少,所以在处理图像SNR和图像细节的关系上要采取折中的办法,不能盲目地以增加图像SNR、CNR为目的,MR成像质量参数是由信号强度参数(SNR、CNR)和几何参数(图像分辨率)共同组成的,两者是相辅相成的关系,信噪比低而几何参数(图像分辨率)高,也可以得出满足临床诊断要求的影像,如本研究中的宫颈r-FOV DWI。

       DWI诊断中最为重要的是ADC值分析,其数值受到诸多因素影响,如磁场强度的大小、B值的选择等。本研究r-FOV DWI测得的ADC值与其他学者的研究结果基本一致[18,19],可能的原因是r-FOV这个技术仅仅只是减小了视野,对于ADC值的影响不大。同时,由于视野减小,可能的伪影干扰更小,所以其ADC值更能准确反映病变的本质。两组间比较,宫颈癌的ADC值低于正常组,表明ADC值可以良好的区分宫颈癌和正常宫颈,这与Schob等[20]指出的组织水分子扩散程度的主要影响因素是细胞密度,由于宫颈癌细胞繁殖速度快,细胞密度显著高于正常组织,加之大分子蛋白质对水分子的吸附作用,使得水分子扩散受限,ADC值降低,导致其ADC值低于正常宫颈的结果一致。

       本研究的不足在于病例数量较少,未能进行大样本的研究,缺乏不同病理类型之间ADC值的对比,在下一步的相关研究中,将进一步扩大病例样本数量,针对宫颈癌的病理学类型做ADC分析。

       综上所述,r-FOV DWI图像质量明显高于f-FOV DWI,且宫颈癌组的ADC值低于正常组。说明使用r-FOV DWI用于宫颈癌的诊断可有效降低图像的变形以及磁敏感伪影,使得病变轮廓更清晰,对早期微小病变的诊断更加准确,通过ADC值的测量可以更好地区分宫颈癌和正常宫颈,对于宫颈癌尤其是早期肿瘤的诊断具有一定的临床价值。

[1]
Luomaranta A, Leminen A, Loukovaara M. Magnetic resonance imaging in the assessment of high-risk features of endometrial carcinoma: a meta-analysis. Int J Gynecol Cancer, 2015, 25(5): 837-842.
[2]
Palmqvist T, Dybdahl WA, Langeland MA, et al. Dosimetric evaluation of manually and inversely optimized treatment planning for high dose rate brachytherapy of cervical cancer. Acta Oncol, 2014, 53(8): 1012-1018.
[3]
Moseley ME, Wendland MF, Kucharczyk J. Magnetic resonance imaging of diffusion and perfusion. Top Magn Reson Imaging, 1991, 3(3): 50-67.
[4]
Backens M. Basic principles and technique of diffusion-weighted imaging and diffusion tensor imaging. Radiologe, 2015, 55(9): 762-770.
[5]
von Morze C, Kelley DA, Shepherd TM, et al. Reduced field-of-view diffusion-weighted imaging of the brain at 7 T. Magn Reson Imaging, 2010, 28(10): 1541-1545.
[6]
Kuroki Y, Nasu K. Advances in breast MRI: diffusion-weighted imaging of the breast. Breast Cancer, 2008, 15(3): 212-217.
[7]
Wilmes LJ, Mclaughlin RL, Newitt DC, et al. High-resolution diffusion-weighted imaging for monitoring breast cancer treatment response. Acad Radiol, 2013, 20(5): 581-589.
[8]
Rosenkrantz AB, Chandarana H, Hindman N, et al. Computed diffusion-weighted imaging of the prostate at 3 T: impact on image quality and tumour detection. Eur Radiol, 2013, 23(11): 3170-3177.
[9]
Koyasu S, Iima M, Umeoka S, et al. The clinical utility of reduced-distortion readout-segmented echo-planar imaging in the head and neck region: initial experience. Eur Radiol, 2014, 24(12): 3088-3096.
[10]
Hao YH, Pan C, Chen WW, et al. Evaluation of the application of small field DWI technique in the diagnosis of thyroid nodules. Radiol Pract, 2016, 31 (8): 704-708.
郝永红,潘初,陈唯唯,等.小视野DWI技术在甲状腺结节诊断中的应用评价.放射学实践, 2016, 31(8): 704-708.
[11]
Akisik FM, Sandrasegaran K, Aisen AM, et al. Abdominal MR imaging at 3.0 T. Radiographics, 2007, 27(5): 1433-1444, 1462-1464.
[12]
Lee VS, Hecht EM, Taouli B, et al. Body and cardiovascular MR imaging at 3.0 T. Radiology, 2007, 244(3): 692-705.
[13]
Singer L, Wilmes LJ, Saritas EU, et al. High-resolution diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging in patients with locally advanced breast cancer. Acad Radiol, 2012, 19(5): 526-534.
[14]
Wu SS, Li Z, Zou XL, et al. Diagnostic value of small field DWI in gallbladder disease. Radiol Pract, 2018, 33 (5): 464-467.
吴思思,李震,邹显伦,等.小视野DWI对胆囊疾病的诊断价值.放射学实践, 2018, 33(5): 464-467.
[15]
Peng Y, Li Z, Tang H, et al. Comparison of reduced field-of-view diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) and conventional DWI techniques in the assessment of rectal carcinoma at 3.0 T: Image quality and histological T staging. J Magn Reson Imaging, 2018, 47(4): 967-975.
[16]
Li A, Xing W, Li H, et al. Subtype differentiation of small (≤4 cm) solid renal mass using volumetric histogram analysis of DWI at 3-T MRI. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 2018, 211(3): 614-623.
[17]
Kang LL, Lu GW, Yu XE, et al. Experimental study on the relationship between MRI scan parameters and signal-to-noise ratio. Chin J Radiol, 2003, 37 (3): 225-227.
康立丽,卢广文,余晓锷,等. MRI扫描参数与信噪比关系的实验研究.中华放射学杂志, 2003, 37(3): 225-227.
[18]
Dong HB, Yu K, Li YD, et al. Application of small field DWI in breast cancer. J Clin Radiol, 2015, 34(3): 360-363.
董海波,俞伉,李亚迪,等.小视野DWI在乳腺癌中的应用研究.临床放射学杂志, 2015, 34(3): 360-363.
[19]
Lyng H, Haraldseth O, Rofstad EK. Measurement of cell density and necrotic fraction in human melanoma xenografts by diffusion weighted magnetic resonance imaging. Magn Reson Med, 2000, 43(6): 828-836.
[20]
Schob S, Meyer HJ, Dieckow J, et al. Histogram analysis of diffusion weighted imaging at 3 t is useful for prediction of lymphatic metastatic spread, proliferative activity, and cellularity in thyroid cancer. Int J Mol Sci, 2017, 18(4): 821.

上一篇 基于多序列MRI影像组学模型预测宫颈鳞癌病理组织分型
下一篇 磁敏感序列多定量参数预测子宫内膜癌微卫星不稳定状态
  
诚聘英才 | 广告合作 | 免责声明 | 版权声明
联系电话:010-67113815
京ICP备19028836号-2