Diagnostic value of apparent diffusion coefficient for the accurate assessment and differentiation of intracranial meningiomas

Acta Radiologica Short Reports

Shazia Bano²  Mustansar Mahmood Waraich¹  Muhammad Afzal Khan²  Saeed Ahmad Buzdar²  Shahid Manzur¹ 

[1] Diagnostic Radiology, Quaid-e-Azam Medical College B.V. Hospital, Bahawalpur, Pakistan

[2] Department of Physics, The Islamia University of Bahawalpur, Bahawalpur, Pakistan

关键词: benign;    malignant;    meningioma;    apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC);    Diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI);   

Others  :  923839
DOI  :  10.1177/2047981613512484

 received in 2013-09-16, accepted in 2013-10-16,  发布年份 2013

【 摘 要 】

Background Diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) along with the calculation of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC), is a novel, non-invasive,and reliable technique of choice for accurate assessment and for the treatment planning of different types of brain tumors.It is more advantageous in the distinction and differentiation of benign from malignant meningiomas on the basis of ADC values.

Purpose To investigate the utility of DW magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and to compare the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC)obtained at two b-values for an authentic and preoperative characterization of meningiomas.

Material and Methods Twenty-six patients with clinically diagnosed or histologically verified meningioma (18 benign and 8 malignant) underwentimaging including DWI at 1.5 T. DW images were obtained at b = 1000 s/mm² and b = 2000 s/mm², ADC maps were generated at both the b-values. Signal intensities (SIs) and ADCs for solid tumorous tissues, contralateralnormal tissues, and peritumoral edema were calculated and normalized ADC (NADC) ratio were determined for tumorous tissues.SI scores, ADC maps, and ADC values were analyzed visually and quantitatively, and were compared at both the b-values.

Results DW images at b = 2000 s/mm² were more conspicuity (either hyperintense or hypointense) with improved contrast. The mean ADC of malignant meningiomas(0.64 ± 0.05 and 0.42 ± 0.03) was significantly lower (P < 0.05) as compared with benign meningiomas (1.04 ± 0.12 and 0.80 ± 0.07) at both the b-values. Mean NADC ratio in the malignanttype was also significantly lower (P < 0.05) than the benign type at both the b-values. Mean ADC values for peritumoral edema do not differ between benign andmalignant meningiomas.

Conclusion 1.5-T DWI using high b-values improved our ability to differentiate benign from malignant meningiomas. DWI may play an importantrole in the preoperative radiological evaluation and the recognition of these types for proper surgical treatment.

【 授权许可】

   
© The Foundation Acta Radiologica 2013 Reprints and permissions: sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav

【 图 表 】

Fig. 1.

Fig. 2.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Hakyemez B, Yildirim N, Gokalp G, et al . The contribution of diffusion weighted MR imaging to distinguishing typical from atypical meningiomas. Neuroradiology 2006; 48: 513–520.
• [2]Carpeggiani P, Crisi G, Trevisan C . MRI of intracranial meningiomas: correlations with histology and physical consistency. Neuroradiology 1993; 35: 532–536.
• [3]Jaaskelainen J, Haltia M, Laasonen E, et al . The growth rate of intracranial meningiomas and its relation to histology: an analysis of 43 patients. Surg Neurol 1985; 24: 165–172.
• [4]Mahmood A, Caccamo DV, Tomecek FJ, et al . Atypical and malignant meningiomas: a clinicopathological review. Neurosurgery 1993; 33: 955–963.
• [5]Zee CS, Chin T, Segall HD, et al . Magnetic resonance imaging of meningiomas. Semin Ultrasound CT MR 1992; 13: 154–169.
• [6]Modha A, Gutin PH . Diagnosis and treatment of atypical and anaplastic meningiomas: a review. Neurosurgery 2005; 57: 538–550.
• [7]Verheggen R, Finkenstaedt M, Bockermann V, et al . Atypical and malignant meningiomas: evaluation of different radiological criteria based on CT and MRI. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 1996; 65: 66–69.
• [8]Yamaguchi N, Kawase T, Sagoh M, et al . Prediction of consistency of meningiomas with preoperative magnetic resonance imaging. Surg Neurol 1997; 48: 579–583.
• [9]Goebell E, Paustenbach S, Vaeterlein O, et al . Low-grade and anaplastic gliomas: differences in architecture evaluated with diffusion-tensor MR imaging. Radiology 2006; 239: 217–222.
• [10]Kwee TC, Galban CJ, Tsien C, et al . Intravoxel water diffusion heterogeneity imaging of human high-grade gliomas. NMRBiomed 2010; 2: 179–187.
• [11]Higano S, Yun X, Kumabe T, et al . Malignant astrocytic tumors: clinical importance of apparent diffusion coefficient in prediction of grade and prognosis. Radiology 2006; 241: 839–846.
• [12]Murakami R, Hirai T, Sugahara T, et al . Grading astrocytic tumors by using apparent diffusion coefficient parameters: superiority of a one- versus two-parameter pilot method. Radiology 2009; 251: 838–845.
• [13]Filippi CG, Edgar MA, Ulug AM, et al . Appearance of meningiomas on diffusion-weighted images: correlating diffusion constants with histopathologic findings. Am J Neuroradiol 2001; 22: 65–72.
• [14]Kawahara Y, Nakada M, Hayashi Y, et al . Prediction of high-grade meningioma by preoperative MRI assessment. J Neurooncol 2012; 108: 147–152.
• [15]Hakyemez B, Yildirim N, Gokalp G, et al . The contribution of diffusion-weighted MR imaging to distinguishing typical from atypical meningiomas. Neuroradiology 2006; 48: 513–520.
• [16]Alvarez-Linera J, Benito-León J, Escribano J, et al . Predicting the histopathological grade of cerebral gliomas using high b value MR DW imaging at 3-tesla. J Neuroimaging 2008; 18: 276–281.