MRI弥散加权成像表观扩散系数在低、高级别脑膜瘤鉴别诊断中的应用

doi:10.3760/cma.j.cn101202-20200304-00063

摘要
图/表
参考文献(16)
相关文章 (15)

全文: PDF (2425 KB) HTML (2 KB)
输出: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

摘要目的探讨常规MRI结合弥散加权成像(DWI)中表观扩散系数(ADC)在低、高级别脑膜瘤的鉴别诊断中的临床应用价值。方法回顾性分析中国科学技术大学附属第一医院2018年1月—2019年8月68例脑膜瘤患者的临床资料,男29例、女39例,年龄24~78(48.62±10.28)岁。其中WHOⅠ级脑膜瘤52例(低级别组),WHO Ⅱ级12例、WHO Ⅲ级4例(高级别组)。患者术前均行常规MRI结合DWI检查。观察两组患者的MRI征象以及DWI特点;比较两组患者脑膜瘤实质和瘤周水肿部位ADC值以及肿瘤实质与对侧脑白质的相对表观扩散系数(rADC),利用ROC曲线分析最佳rADC值对低、高级别脑膜瘤的诊断效能。结果两组患者基线资料差异均无统计学意义(P值均＞0.05)。高级别组脑膜瘤边缘不规整、强化不均匀、边缘水肿区、脑膜尾征和囊变、坏死、钙化区等影像学征象发生率明显高于低级别组脑膜瘤,差异均有统计学差异(P值均＜0.05)。52例低级别组脑膜瘤中,有38例DWI、ADC均呈等信号,14例DWI呈稍高信号、ADC呈稍低信号;16例高级别组脑膜瘤实质部分DWI呈高信号、ADC呈低信号,而囊变、出血坏死、钙化区呈高信号。低级别组、高级别组脑膜瘤肿瘤实质部分 ADC值分别为(0.94±0.14)×10^-3、(0.73±0.11)×10^-3 mm²/s,rADC值分别为(1.16±0.18)×10^-3、(0.95±0.14)×10^-3 mm²/s,低级别组脑膜瘤实质部分ADC和rADC值均明显高于高级别组脑膜瘤,差异均有统计学意义(t=5.491、4.277, P值均<0.01);低级别组、高级别组脑膜瘤的瘤周水肿区域ADC分别为(1.82±0.19)×10^-3、(1.88±0.21)×10^-3 mm²/s,rADC值分别为(2.29±0.24)×10^-3、(2.38±0.29)×10^-3 mm²/s,差异均无统计学意义(P值均>0.05);以rADC值诊断低级别组、高级别组脑膜瘤的最佳临界点为1.035×10^-3 mm²/s,其灵敏度为88.5%,特异度为87.5%。结论常规MRI结合DWI中ADC值的测量对低、高级别脑膜瘤的鉴别诊断具有重要临床应用价值。

	服务

	把本文推荐给朋友
	加入我的书架
	加入引用管理器
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	作者相关文章
	汪红梅
	谢强
	廖琴
	邓克学
	吕洋
	陈传玉

关键词 ：脑膜瘤, 磁共振成像, 弥散加权成像, 表观扩散系数

Abstract：Objective This work aims to explore the clinical value of conventional MRI combined with apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) in the differential diagnosis of low- and high-grade meningiomas.Methods Retrospective analysis was conducted on clinical data obtained from 68 patients with meningioma [(29 males and 39 females, aged 24-78 (48.62±10.28) years] in the First Affiliated Hospital of the University of Science and Technology of China from January 2018 to August 2019. Among these patients, 52 had WHO grade Ⅰ meningioma (low grade group), 12 had WHO grade Ⅱ, and 4 had WHO grade Ⅲ(high grade group). All patients underwent routine MRI and diffusion weighted imaging(DWI) examination prior to their operation. Comparison of MRI signs, diffusion-weighted imaging characteristics, ADC values of meningioma parenchyma and peritumoral edema, and relative apparent diffusion coefficient (rADC) of tumor parenchyma and contralateral white matter was conducted between the two groups. Receiver operating characteristic(ROC) curve was used to analyze the diagnostic efficacy of best rADC values for low- and high-grade meningiomas.Results No statistical difference was found in the baseline data of the two groups (all P values＞0.05). High-grade meningioma presents a high occurrence frequency of these imaging signs, such as irregularity on tumor edge, uneven enhancement, marginal edema, meningeal tail and cyst changes, necrosis, and calcification, and the differences reached a statistical significance (all P values<0.05). Among the cases of low-grade meningioma, 32 showed equal signals on DWI and ADC, and 14 showed slightly high signal on DWI and slightly low signal on ADC. Sixteen cases of high-grade meningioma showed high signal on DWI, cystic changes, hemorrhagic necrosis, and calcified areas but low signal on ADC. The ADC and rADC values of the parenchyma of low-grade meningioma were (0.94±0.14)×10^-3 and (1.16±0.18)×10^-3 mm²/s, respectively, which were significantly higher than those of high-grade meningioma at (0.73±0.11)×10^-3 and (0.95±0.14)×10^-3 mm²/s, respectively, and the differences were statistically significant (t=5.491, 4.277, all P values<0.01). The ADC and rADC values of the peritumoral edema area of low-grade meningioma were (1.82±0.19)×10^-3 and (2.29±0.24)×10^-3 mm²/s, respectively, those of high-grade meningioma were (1.88±0.21)×10^-3 and (2.38±0.29)×10^-3 mm²/s, respectively, no significant differences were observed between two groups (all P values>0.05). The best critical points for diagnosing low- and high-grade meningiomas were rADC value of 1.035×10^-3 mm²/s, sensitivity of 88.5%, and a specificity of 87.5%.Conclusions Conventional MRI combined with DWI ADC value has important clinical value for the differential diagnosis of low- and high-grade meningiomas.

Key words： Apparent diffusion coefficient Magnetic resonance imaging Magnetic resonance Diffusion weighted imaging

收稿日期: 2020-04-04

基金资助:中央高校科研联合基金(WK9110000054)

通讯作者: 邓克学,Email:dengkexue-anhui@163.com

引用本文:

汪红梅, 谢强, 廖琴, 邓克学, 吕洋, 陈传玉. MRI弥散加权成像表观扩散系数在低、高级别脑膜瘤鉴别诊断中的应用[J]. 中华解剖与临床杂志, 2020, 25(4): 344-349.
Wang Hongmei, Xie Qiang, Liao Qin, Deng Kexue, Lyu Yang, Chen Chuanyu. Application of apparent diffusion coefficient of MRI diffusion-weighted imaging in the differential diagnosis of low- and high-grade meningiomas. Chinese Journal of Anatomy and Clinics, 2020, 25(4): 344-349.

链接本文:

http://www.cjac.com.cn/CN/10.3760/cma.j.cn101202-20200304-00063 或 http://www.cjac.com.cn/CN/Y2020/V25/I4/344

[1]	Domingues PH, Teodósio C, Otero á, et al. The protein expression profile of meningioma cells is associated with distinct cytogenetic tumour subgroups[J]. Neuropathol Appl Neurobiol, 2015, 41(3): 319-332. DOI:10.1111/nan.12127.
[2]	Wen PY, Huse JT. 2016 World Health Organization classification of central nervous system tumors[J]. Continuum Lifelong Learning in Neurology, 2017, 23(6): 1531-1547. DOI:10.1212/CON.0000000000000536.
[3]	Surov A, Gottschling S, Mawrin C, et al. Diffusion-weighted imaging in meningioma: prediction of tumor grade and association with histopathological parameters[J]. Transl Oncol, 2015, 8(6): 517-523. DOI:10.1016/j.tranon.2015.11.012.
[4]	Champeaux C, Wilson E, Brandner S, et al. World Health Organization grade Ⅲ meningiomas. A retrospective study for outcome and prognostic factors assessment[J]. Br J Neurosurg, 2015, 29(5): 693-698. DOI:10.3109/02688697.2015.1054350.
[5]	许蕾, 王椋, 许道洲. 非典型脑膜瘤MRI表现[J]. 中国医学计算机成像杂志, 2015, 21(3): 205-209. DOI:10.19627/j.cnki.cn311700/th.2015.03.002.Xu L, Wang L, Xu DZ, et al. MRI findings of the atypical meningioma[J]. Chinese Computed Medical Imaging, 2015, 21(3): 205-209. DOI:10.19627/j.cnki.cn311700/th.2015.03.002.
[6]	Togao O, Hiwatashi A, Yamashita K, et al. Differentiation of high-grade and low-grade diffuse gliomas by intravoxel incoherent motion MR imaging[J]. Neuro Oncol, 2016, 18(1): 132-141. DOI:10.1093/neuonc/nov147.
[7]	White NS, Dale AM. Distinct effects of nuclear volume fraction and cell diameter on high b-value diffusion MRI contrast in tumors[J]. Magn Reson Med, 2014, 72(5): 1435-1443. DOI:10.1002/mrm.25039.
[8]	苏文婷, 潘自来, 徐敬慈, 等. 磁共振弥散成像中T2穿透效应的影响及解决方法研究[J].中国医学计算机成像杂志, 2015, 21(3): 219-223. DOI:10.19627/j.cnki.cn31-1700/th.2015.03.005.Su WT, Pan ZL, Xu JC, et al. Investigation and solution for T2 shine-through effects in MR diffusion-weighted imaging[J]. Chinese Journal of Medical Computer Imaging, 2015, 21(3): 219-223. DOI:10.19627/j.cnki.cn31-1700/th.2015.03.005.
[9]	Kızıldağ Yİ, Arslan G, Öztürk E, et al. Diffusion weighted MR imaging of breast and correlation of prognostic factors in breast cancer[J]. Balkan Med J, 2016, 33(3): 301-307. DOI:10.5152/balkanmedj.2016.140555.
[10]	王亚婷, 朱艳, 陆洋, 等. 表观弥散系数平均值及最小值与肝癌病理学特征的相关性研究[J]. 中国临床医学影像杂志, 2017, 28(11): 805-809. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1008-1062.2017.11.011.Wang YT, Zhu Y, Lu Y, et al. The relationship between values of ADCmin and ADCmean and pathological features of liver cancer: a primary study[J]. Chinese Journal of Clinical Imaging, 2017, 28(11): 805-809. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1008-1062.2017.11.011.
[11]	Belli P, Costantini M, Bufi E, et al. Diffusion magnetic resonance imaging in breast cancer characterisation: correlations between the apparent diffusion coefficient and major prognostic factors[J]. Radiol Med, 2015, 120(3): 268-276. DOI:10.1007/s11547-014-0442-8.
[12]	王骅, 刘莉, 尹波, 等. 脑膜瘤瘤周水肿与病理学分型之间的相关性研究[J]. 中国临床神经科学, 2013, 21(3): 296-300. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1008-0678.2013.03.010.Wang H, Liu L, Yin B, et al. Correlation between peritumoral edema and its histological subtype in meningiomas[J]. Chinese Journal of Clinical Neurosciences, 2013, 21(3): 296-300. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1008-0678.2013.03.010.
[13]	刘杨颖秋, 尚劲, 王微微, 等. 基于MRI常规序列信号、强化程度以及ADC值鉴别不同亚型脑膜瘤[J]. 临床放射学杂志, 2017, 36(6): 784-789. DOI:10.13437/j.cnki.jcr.2017.06.007.Liu-Yang YQ, Shang J, Wang WW, et al. Differentiation of meningioma subtypes using conventional MR signal intensity, enhancement degree and ADC value[J]. Journal of Clinical Radiology, 2017, 36(6): 784-789. DOI:10.13437/j.cnki.jcr.2017.06.007.
[14]	余娟, 刘侠静, 林帆, 等. 脑膜瘤WHO最新病理分型的MRI影像特点比较[J]. 深圳中西医结合杂志, 2019, 29(10): 60-64. DOI:10.16458/j.cnki.1007-0893.2019.10.026.Yu J, Liu XJ, Lin F, et al. Comparative analysis of MRI characteristics of meningioma with the latest WHO pathological classification[J]. Shenzhen Journal of Integrated Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine. 2019, 29(10): 60-64. DOI:10.16458/j.cnki.1007-0893.2019.10.026.
[15]	Bulakbasi N, Guvenc I, Onguru O, et al. The added value of the apparent diffusion coefficient calculation to magnetic resonance imaging in the differentiation and grading of malignant brain tumors[J]. J Comput Assist Tomogr, 2004, 28(6): 735-746. DOI:10.1097/00004728-200411000-00003.
[16]	Nagar VA, Ye JR, Ng WH, et al. Diffusion-weighted MR imaging: diagnosing atypical or malignant meningiomas and detecting tumor dedifferentiation[J]. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol, 2008, 29(6): 1147-1152. DOI:10.3174/ajnr.A0996.