DWI. The Relationship Between ADC of Diffusion-Weighted Magnetic Resonance Imaging and SUV of 18 F-FDG PET /CT Metabolic Imaging in Lung Carcinoma

Transcription

1 DOI: /j.cnki.jcr MR ADC 18 F - FDG PET /CT SUV * MR DWI ADC PET /CT SUV MR DWI PET /CT 26 MR DWI PET /CT ADC ADCmin ADC ADCmean SUV SUVmax SUV SUVmean ADC radc ADCmin / ADCmean SUV rsuv SUVmax / SUVmean ADCmin SUVmax ADCmean SUVmean radc rsuv 26 MR DWI ADCmin ± mm 2 /s ADCmean ± mm 2 /s radc ± PET /CT SUVmax ± 4. 6 SUVmean 5. 6 ± 1. 8 rsuv ± ADCmin SUVmax P = > ADCmean SUVmean P = > radc rsuv P = < MR DWI radc PET /CT rsuv ADC SUV X The Relationship Between ADC of Diffusion-Weighted Magnetic Resonance Imaging and SUV of 18 F-FDG PET /CT Metabolic Imaging in Lung Carcinoma CHEN Guangxiang QU Chunhui ZHENG Ting et al. Department of Radiology the Affiliated Hospital of Luzhou Medical College Luzhou Sichuan Province P. R. China Abstract Objective To study the relationship between ADC of diffusion weighted magnetic resonance imaging and SUV of 18 F-FDG PET /CT metabolic imaging in lung carcinoma. Methods The data of diffusion weighted imaging DWI and PET /CT were collected in 26 patients with lung carcinoma. The ADCmin ADCmean SUVmax and SUVmean of tumor were respectively measured on corresponding DWI and PET /CT and the radc ADCmin / ADCmean and rsuv SUVmax / SUVmean were calculated. The relationship between ADCmin and SUVmax ADCmean and SUVmean radc and rsuv were analyzed. Results The ADCmin ADCmean and radc were ± mm 2 /s ± mm 2 /s and ± respectively. The SUVmax SUVmean and rsuv were ± ± 1. 8 and ± respectively. There was no significant relationship either between ADCmin and SUVmax P = > or between ADCmean and SUVmean P = > The radc was negative correlated with the rsuv P = < and the Correlation coefficient was Conclusion There is negative relationship between radc of DWI and rsuv of 18 F-FDG PET /CT so it is possible that DWI and FDG PET /CT can play a complementary role in diagnosis of lung carcinoma. Magnetic resonance imaging Diffusion weighted imaging Tomography emission-computed Tomography X- ray computed Lung cancer * MR

2 DWI CT 120 kv 0. 5 mm PET 2D PET 6 ~ 7 3 min 1 2 MR DWI 5 mm CT PET ADC PET /CT SUV 1. 3 ADC SUV DWI ADC MR DWI ADC PET /CT SUV T 2 WI DWI region of interest ROI ROI 20 mm 2 MRI PET /CT 26 5 mm 2 cm ~ 68 ROI ADC ADCmin ADC ADCmean ± MRI MRI Philips Gyroscan Intera 1. 5 T Nova MRI DWI Vmean SUV rsuv SUVmax / SU- SUV SUVmax SUV SU- sensitive encode imaging SENSE 7 Vmean 9 ROI 1. 4 ± MRI SPSS ADCmin SUVmax T 1 WI T 2 WI ADCmean SUVmean radc rsuv SPIR DWI Pearson P < R DWI 2 EPI 26 DWI SPIR TR 6900 ms TE 58 ms 5 mm 1 mm FOV 355 mm b s /mm 2 NSA = 2 18 F- 18 F-FDG PET /CT Philips 31 7 T 2 WI DWI ADC DWI MRI PET /CT ADCmin ADCmean 3 ADCmin 2 ADCmean ADCmin ADCmean ADC radc ADCmin / 13 9 ADCmean DWI ADC PET /CT ADC ADCmin ± mm 2 /s ADCmean ± mm 2 /s radc ± F-FDG PET / CT SUVmax ± 4. 6 SUVmean 5. 6 ± 1. 8 rsuv ± GEMINI TF PET /CT 18 F-FDG Siemens ~ 8 ADCmin SUVmax > P = > ADCmean SUVmean 95% 4 h P = > radc rsuv 18 F-FDG ~ 0. 2 P = < ~ mci /kg 40 ~ 60 min 11

3 957 3 DWI DWI 2 - ADC MRI MRI 9 DWI ADC DWI PET /CT ADC 3 DWI SUV ADC ADC 4 ~ 7 DWI SUV ADC 8 MR EPI SUV

4 ADC SUV T 2 b b 500 s /mm 2 4 DWI 5 18 F-FDG PET /CT ADC SUV ADC SUV MRI Palumbo ADC DWI EPI SUV r 2 = P = SUV ADC SUV ADC Ho ADC ADC SUV ADC SUV r = P = ADC SUV r = P = PET ADC SUV r = P = ADC SUV Mori 12 ADC ADC MR DWI b SUV r = P < ADCmin SU- DWI Vmax ADCmean SUVmean radc rsuv ADCmin SUVmax ADCmean SUVmean radc rsuv 18 F-FDG PET /CT MR DWI P = < SUV ADC ADC SUV ADC SUV 1 Ono K Ochiai R Yoshida T 13 ADCmin SU- Vmax ADCmean SUVmean ADC SUV radc rsuv ADCmean SUVmean 3 Yong C Zhang XP DWI PET /CT ADC SUV radc rsuv ADCmin SUVmax ADCmean SUVmean b MR b DWI et al. Comparison of Diffusion-Weighted MRI and 2- Fluorine-18 -Fluoro-2-Deoxy-D- Glucose Positron Emission Tomography FDG-PET for Detecting Primary Colorectal and Regional Lymph Node Metastases. J Magn Reson Imaging Koh DM Collins DJ. Diffusion-weighted MRI in the body applications and challenges in oncology. AJR Sun YS et al. Apparent diffusion coefficient potential imaging biomarker for prediction and early detection of response to chemotherapy in hepatic metastases. Radiology Liu H Liu Y Yu T et al. Usefulness of diffusion-weighted MR imaging in the evaluation of pulmonary lesions. Eur Radiol

5 959 5 Matoba M Tonami H Kondou T et al Lung carcinoma diffusionweighted MR imaging-preliminary evaluation with apparent diffusion coefficient. Radiology Sun YS Zhang XP Tang L et al. Locally Advanced Rectal Carcinoma Treated with Preoperative Chemotherapy and Radiation Therapy Preliminary Analysis of Diffusion-weighted MR Imaging for Early Detection of Tumor Histopathologic Downstaging. Radiology Shuto K Saito H Ohira G et al. Diffusion weighted MR imaging for postoperative nodal recurrence of esophageal squamous cell cancer in comparison with FDG PET. Jpn J Cancer Chemother Schaefer PW Grant PE Gonzalez RG. Diffusion-weighted MR imaging of the brain. Radiology Uto T Takehara Y Nakamura Y et al. Higher sensitivity and specificity for diffusion-weighted imaging of malignant lung lesions without apparent diffusion coefficient quantification. Radiology Palumbo B Angotti F Marano GD et al. Relationship between PET FDG and MRI apparent diffusion coefficients in brain tumors. Q J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Ho KC Lin G Wang JJ et al. Correlation of apparent diffusion Coefficients measured by 3 T diffusion-weighted MRI and SUV from FDG PET /CT in primary cervical cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Mori T Nomori H Ikeda K et al. Diffusion-Weighted magnetic resonance Imaging for diagnosing malignant pulmonary nodules / masses comparison With positron emission tomography. J Thorac Oncol PET PET /CT * 1 CT HE CT 42 HU 1 CT 55 HU ng /ml ng /ml 199 CA U /ml 125 CA U /ml 2. 0 cm 2. 0 cm 2. 0 cm B 5 cm CT 2. 0 cm 3 cm * 1. 5 cm