Application of texture analysis based on apparent diffusion coefficient maps in discriminating different stages of rectal cancer

2016 ◽  
Vol 45 (6) ◽  
pp. 1798-1808 ◽  
Author(s):  
Liheng Liu ◽  
Yuhui Liu ◽  
Liang Xu ◽  
Zhenjiang Li ◽  
Han Lv ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rectal Cancer ◽  
Diffusion Coefficient ◽  
Apparent Diffusion Coefficient ◽  
Texture Analysis ◽  
Apparent Diffusion ◽  
Apparent Diffusion Coefficient Maps

scholarly journals [OA047] Robust radiomic feature selection in magnetic resonance apparent diffusion coefficient maps of rectal cancer

2018 ◽  
Vol 52 ◽  
pp. 20
Author(s):  
Leonard Wee ◽  
Alberto Traverso ◽  
Michal Kazmierski ◽  
Petros Kalendralis ◽  
Henrik Dahl Nissen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rectal Cancer ◽  
Feature Selection ◽  
Diffusion Coefficient ◽  
Magnetic Resonance ◽  
Apparent Diffusion Coefficient ◽  
Apparent Diffusion ◽  
Apparent Diffusion Coefficient Maps

scholarly journals Apparent diffusion coefficient cannot discriminate metastatic and non-metastatic lymph nodes in rectal cancer: a meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexey Surov ◽  
Hans-Jonas Meyer ◽  
Maciej Pech ◽  
Maciej Powerski ◽  
Jasan Omari ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rectal Cancer ◽  
Diffusion Coefficient ◽  
Apparent Diffusion Coefficient ◽  
Lymph Nodes ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Adc Value ◽  
Metastatic Lymph Nodes ◽  
Metastatic Lymph ◽  
Apparent Diffusion ◽  
Adc Values

Abstract Background Our aim was to provide data regarding use of diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) for distinguishing metastatic and non-metastatic lymph nodes (LN) in rectal cancer. Methods MEDLINE library, EMBASE, and SCOPUS database were screened for associations between DWI and metastatic and non-metastatic LN in rectal cancer up to February 2021. Overall, 9 studies were included into the analysis. Number, mean value, and standard deviation of DWI parameters including apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values of metastatic and non-metastatic LN were extracted from the literature. The methodological quality of the studies was investigated according to the QUADAS-2 assessment. The meta-analysis was undertaken by using RevMan 5.3 software. DerSimonian, and Laird random-effects models with inverse-variance weights were used to account the heterogeneity between the studies. Mean DWI values including 95% confidence intervals were calculated for metastatic and non-metastatic LN. Results ADC values were reported for 1376 LN, 623 (45.3%) metastatic LN, and 754 (54.7%) non-metastatic LN. The calculated mean ADC value (× 10−3 mm2/s) of metastatic LN was 1.05, 95%CI (0.94, 1.15). The calculated mean ADC value of the non-metastatic LN was 1.17, 95%CI (1.01, 1.33). The calculated sensitivity and specificity were 0.81, 95%CI (0.74, 0.89) and 0.67, 95%CI (0.54, 0.79). Conclusion No reliable ADC threshold can be recommended for distinguishing of metastatic and non-metastatic LN in rectal cancer.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document