4.6 Article

Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasound evaluation of choroidal melanomas after proton-beam therapy

期刊

RADIOLOGIA MEDICA
卷 120, 期 7, 页码 634-640

出版社

SPRINGER-VERLAG ITALIA SRL
DOI: 10.1007/s11547-015-0509-1

关键词

Apparent diffusion coefficient; Internal reflectivity; Magnetic resonance imaging; Ocular melanoma; Proton-beam therapy; Ultrasound

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study was undertaken to compare the ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging parameters of ocular melanoma and to assess their variation after proton-beam therapy. Fifteen choroidal melanoma patients treated with proton-beam therapy were enroled in the study. All patients underwent ophthalmologic evaluations, ultrasound, conventional magnetic resonance (MR) imaging and diffusion-weighted MR imaging before the start of therapy and 3 and 6 months after therapy. Basal diameters, thickness, internal reflectivity, tumour volumes and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values of ocular melanomas were measured at each examination. Correlations between internal reflectivity and ADC were investigated. No significant changes were seen in tumour diameters and tumour height as assessed by B-scan and A-scan, respectively. Significant increase in mean tumour internal reflectivity was detected at 6 months (baseline 35 % +/- A 11; 6 months 48 % +/- A 8, Tukey-Kramer p = 0.005). On MRI, compared to baseline (mean 547 +/- A 262 mm(3)), a significant reduction in volume was seen at 6 months (Tukey-Kramer p = 0.045) (mean volume 339 +/- A 170 mm(3), mean reduction 38 %). A significant increase in ADC (baseline 1,002 +/- A 109 mm(2)/s) was detected both at 3 and 6 months after proton therapy (respectively, 1,454 +/- A 90 and 1,833 +/- A 261 mm(2)/s, both p < 0.001). By MRI, in particular by ADC assessment, it is possible to detect early variations in melanoma treated by proton-beam therapy. This examination could be used together with ultrasound in the follow-up of this treatment.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据