The Role of Diffusion‑weighted Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Evaluation of Brain Mass Lesions
Article Sidebar
Views | PDF/EPUB Downloads:
13
/ 1
/ 2
Main Article Content
Abstract
Context: The purpose of this study was to assess the role of diffusion-weighted-magnetic resonance imaging (DW-MRI) and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values in the evaluation of different benign and malignant brain mass lesions with histopathological correlation.
Aims: To assess the role of DW‑MRI in the evaluation of different mass lesions of the brain with histopathological correlation. To evaluate the role of ADC values in characterization and differentiation of benign and malignant mass lesions of the brain.
Settings and Design: The study design was a cross-sectional study and it was done in patients who were referred to Victoria Hospital attached to Bangalore Medical College and Research Institute (BMC and RI), Bengaluru between December 2012 and November 2014. The sample size of the study was 50.
Subjects and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 50 MR examinations of patients who were referred to Department of Radio Diagnosis, BMC, and RI, Bengaluru for intracranial mass lesion evaluation with MRI. All of them had undergone conventional MRI examination with Siemens AVANTO 1.5T scanner, and we determined ADC values and signal intensities on DW images (DWIs). In all patients with contrast‑enhanced tumors, region of interests (ROIs) were placed in the enhanced region. In patients with nonenhancing tumors, ROIs were placed in the solid part of the lesion. We also evaluated the correlation between ADC values and cellularity in the mass lesions. Additional clinical details and histopathological findings were correlated with the DWI and ADC findings for radiologic-pathologic concordance.
Statistical Analysis: Brain MRI results of 50 patients with histologically verified or clinically diagnosed brain mass lesions were subjected to analysis. They ranged in age from 2 to 72 years (mean, 43.5 years). The examinations were performed with a 1.5T scanner, an 8‑channel surface head coil. The examination protocol included the following sequences and images: Turbo spin‑echo (SE) T2‑weighted images (3920/102/1), fluid‑attenuated inversion recovery (2500/9000/111/1) ([inversion time/repetition time (TR)/echo time (TE)/excitations], and SE T1‑weighted images [488/10/1] [TR/TE/excitations]), carried out in three planes, before and after contrast medium administration (in a standard dose). Results: A positive correlation was found in the comparison of mean ADC values for high‑grade gliomas (1.19 × 10−3 mm2/s ± 0.2) and metastasis (0.833 × 10−3 mm2/s ± 0.2), low‑grade gliomas (1.34 × 10−3 mm2/s ± 0.2), and medulloblastomas (0.68 × 10−3 mm²/s ± 0.075), as well as for in epidermoid cyst and necrotic areas in malignant tumors.
Conclusion: ADC is useful in the differentiation of various brain mass lesions, in grading brain tumors, and differentiation of benign cystic and malignant necrotic areas. The combination of routine image interpretation and ADC had a higher
predictive value. The ADCs of glioma, metastasis, and meningioma are related to tumor cellularity. We believe that DWIs and ADCs can provide information useful to diagnose brain mass lesions that cannot be obtained with conventional MRI alone.
Downloads
Article Details
Section
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
This is an open access journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
How to Cite
References
1. Okamoto K, Ito J, Takahashi N, Ishikawa K, Furusawa T, Tokiguchi S, et al. MRI of high‑grade astrocytic tumors: Early appearance and evolution. Neuroradiology 2002;44:395‑402.
2. Bulakbasi N, Guvenc I, Onguru O, Erdogan E, Tayfun C, Ucoz T. The added value of the apparent diffusion coefficient calculation to
magnetic resonance imaging in the differentiation and grading of malignant brain tumors. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2004;28:735‑46.
3. Chien D, Buxton RB, Kwong KK, Brady TJ, Rosen BR. MR diffusion imaging of the human brain. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1990; 14:514‑20.
4. Larsson HB, Thomsen C, Frederiksen J, Stubgaard M, Henriksen O. In vivo magnetic resonance diffusion measurement in the brain of patients with multiple sclerosis. Magn Reson Imaging 1992;10:7‑12.
5. Sugahara T, Korogi Y, Kochi M, Ikushima I, Shigematu Y, Hirai T, et al. Usefulness of diffusion‑weighted MRI with echo‑planar
technique in the evaluation of cellularity in gliomas. J Magn Reson Imaging 1999;9:53‑60.
6. Noguchi K, Watanabe N, Nagayoshi T, Kanazawa T, Toyoshima S, Shimizu M, et al. Role of diffusion‑weighted echo‑planar MRI
in distinguishing between brain brain abscess and tumour: A preliminary report. Neuroradiology 1999;41:171‑4.
7. Tsuruda JS, Chew WM, Moseley ME, Norman D. Diffusion‑weighted MR imaging of the brain: Value of differentiating between extraaxial cysts and epidermoid tumors. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 1990;11:925‑31.
8. Krabbe K, Gideon P, Wagn P, Hansen U, Thomsen C, Madsen F. MR diffusion imaging of human intracranial tumours. Neuroradiology 1997;39:483‑9.
9. Fan GG, Deng QL, Wu ZH, Guo QY. Usefulness of diffusion/ perfusion‑weighted MRI in patients with non‑enhancing supratentorial brain gliomas: A valuable tool to predict tumour grading? Br J Radiol 2006;79:652‑8.
10. Kelly PJ, Daumas‑Duport C, Kispert DB, Kall BA, Scheithauer BW, Illig JJ. Imaging‑based stereotaxic serial biopsies in untreated
intracranial glial neoplasms. J Neurosurg 1987;66:865‑74.
11. Gauvain KM, McKinstry RC, Mukherjee P, Perry A, Neil JJ, Kaufman BA, et al. Evaluating pediatric brain tumor cellularity with
diffusion‑tensor imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2001;177:449‑54.
12. Gupta RK, Cloughesy TF, Sinha U, Garakian J, Lazareff J, Rubino G, et al. Relationships between choline magnetic resonance
spectroscopy, apparent diffusion coefficient and quantitative histopathology in human glioma. J Neurooncol 2000;50:215‑26.
13. Filippi CG, Edgar MA, Ulug AM, Prowda JC, Heier LA, Zimmerman RD. Appearance of meningiomason diffusion‑weighted images: Correlating diffusion constants with histopathologic findings. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2001;22:65‑72.
14. Yamasaki F, Kurisu K, Satoh K, Arita K, Sugiyama K, Ohtaki M, et al. Apparent diffusion coefficient of human brain tumors at MR
imaging. Radiology 2005;235:985‑91.
15. Rumboldt Z, Camacho DL, Lake D, Welsh CT, Castillo M. Apparent diffusion coefficients for differentiation of cerebellar tumors in
children. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2006;27:1362‑9.
16. Ebisu T, Tanaka C, Umeda M, Kitamura M, Naruse S, Higuchi T, et al. Discrimination of brain abscess from necrotic or cystic tumors by diffusion‑weighted echo planar imaging. Magn Reson Imaging 1996;14:1113‑6.