4.5 Article

Diffusion-weighted Imaging of the Breast: Principles and Clinical Applications

期刊

RADIOGRAPHICS
卷 31, 期 4, 页码 1059-1084

出版社

RADIOLOGICAL SOC NORTH AMERICA
DOI: 10.1148/rg.314105160

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Diffusion-weighted imaging provides a novel contrast mechanism in magnetic resonance (MR) imaging and has a high sensitivity in the detection of changes in the local biologic environment. A significant advantage of diffusion-weighted MR imaging over conventional contrast material-enhanced MR imaging is its high sensitivity to change in the microscopic cellular environment without the need for intravenous contrast material injection. Approaches to the assessment of diffusion-weighted breast imaging findings include assessment of these data alone and interpretation of the data in conjunction with T2-weighted imaging findings. In addition, the analysis of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) value can be undertaken either in isolation or in combination with diffusion-weighted and T2-weighted imaging. Most previous studies have evaluated ADC value alone; however, overlap in the ADC values of malignant and benign disease has been observed. This overlap may be partly due to selection of b value, which can influence the concomitant effect of perfusion and emphasize the contribution of multicomponent model influences. The simultaneous assessment of diffusion-weighted and T2-weighted imaging data and ADC value has the potential to improve specificity. In addition, the use of diffusion-weighted imaging in a standard breast MR imaging protocol may heighten sensitivity and thereby improve diagnostic accuracy. Standardization of diffusion-weighted imaging parameters is needed to allow comparison of multicenter studies and assessment of the clinical utility of diffusion-weighted imaging and ADC values in breast evaluation. Supplemental material available at http://radiographics.rsna.org/lookup/suppl/doi: 10.1148/rg.314105160/-/DC1. (C) RSNA, 2011 radiographics.rsna.org

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

4.5
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