Cargando…
Differentiating T1a–T1b from T2 in gastric cancer lesions with three different measurement approaches based on contrast-enhanced T1W imaging at 3.0 T
BACKGROUND: To explore the diagnostic value of three different measurement approaches in differentiating T1a–T1b from T2 gastric cancer (GC) lesions. METHODS: A total of 95 consecutive patients with T1a–T2 stage of GC who performed preoperative MRI were retrospectively enrolled between January 2017...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8480061/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34583642 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12880-021-00672-7 |
_version_ | 1784576394224730112 |
---|---|
author | Yuan, Yuan Ren, Shengnan Wang, Tiegong Shen, Fu Hao, Qiang Lu, Jianping |
author_facet | Yuan, Yuan Ren, Shengnan Wang, Tiegong Shen, Fu Hao, Qiang Lu, Jianping |
author_sort | Yuan, Yuan |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: To explore the diagnostic value of three different measurement approaches in differentiating T1a–T1b from T2 gastric cancer (GC) lesions. METHODS: A total of 95 consecutive patients with T1a–T2 stage of GC who performed preoperative MRI were retrospectively enrolled between January 2017 and November 2020. The parameters MRI T stage (subjective evaluation), thickness, maximum area and volume of the lesions were evaluated by two radiologists. Specific indicators including AUC, optimal cutoff, sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) of MRI T stage, thickness, maximum area and volume for differentiating T1a–T1b from T2 stage lesions were calculated. The ROC curves were compared by the Delong test. Decision curve analysis (DCA) was used to evaluate the clinical benefit. RESULTS: The ROC curves for thickness (AUC = 0.926), maximum area (AUC = 0.902) and volume (AUC = 0.897) were all significantly better than those of the MRI T stage (AUC = 0.807) in differentiating T1a–T1b from T2 lesions, with p values of 0.004, 0.034 and 0.041, respectively. The values corresponding to the thickness (including AUC, sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, PPV, NPV, PLR and NLR) were all higher than those corresponding to the MRI T stage, maximum area and volume. The DCA curves indicated that the parameter thickness could provide the highest clinical benefit if the threshold probability was above 35%. CONCLUSIONS: Thickness may provide an efficient approach to rapidly distinguish T1a–T1b from T2 stage GC lesions. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8480061 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-84800612021-09-30 Differentiating T1a–T1b from T2 in gastric cancer lesions with three different measurement approaches based on contrast-enhanced T1W imaging at 3.0 T Yuan, Yuan Ren, Shengnan Wang, Tiegong Shen, Fu Hao, Qiang Lu, Jianping BMC Med Imaging Research Article BACKGROUND: To explore the diagnostic value of three different measurement approaches in differentiating T1a–T1b from T2 gastric cancer (GC) lesions. METHODS: A total of 95 consecutive patients with T1a–T2 stage of GC who performed preoperative MRI were retrospectively enrolled between January 2017 and November 2020. The parameters MRI T stage (subjective evaluation), thickness, maximum area and volume of the lesions were evaluated by two radiologists. Specific indicators including AUC, optimal cutoff, sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) of MRI T stage, thickness, maximum area and volume for differentiating T1a–T1b from T2 stage lesions were calculated. The ROC curves were compared by the Delong test. Decision curve analysis (DCA) was used to evaluate the clinical benefit. RESULTS: The ROC curves for thickness (AUC = 0.926), maximum area (AUC = 0.902) and volume (AUC = 0.897) were all significantly better than those of the MRI T stage (AUC = 0.807) in differentiating T1a–T1b from T2 lesions, with p values of 0.004, 0.034 and 0.041, respectively. The values corresponding to the thickness (including AUC, sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, PPV, NPV, PLR and NLR) were all higher than those corresponding to the MRI T stage, maximum area and volume. The DCA curves indicated that the parameter thickness could provide the highest clinical benefit if the threshold probability was above 35%. CONCLUSIONS: Thickness may provide an efficient approach to rapidly distinguish T1a–T1b from T2 stage GC lesions. BioMed Central 2021-09-28 /pmc/articles/PMC8480061/ /pubmed/34583642 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12880-021-00672-7 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Yuan, Yuan Ren, Shengnan Wang, Tiegong Shen, Fu Hao, Qiang Lu, Jianping Differentiating T1a–T1b from T2 in gastric cancer lesions with three different measurement approaches based on contrast-enhanced T1W imaging at 3.0 T |
title | Differentiating T1a–T1b from T2 in gastric cancer lesions with three different measurement approaches based on contrast-enhanced T1W imaging at 3.0 T |
title_full | Differentiating T1a–T1b from T2 in gastric cancer lesions with three different measurement approaches based on contrast-enhanced T1W imaging at 3.0 T |
title_fullStr | Differentiating T1a–T1b from T2 in gastric cancer lesions with three different measurement approaches based on contrast-enhanced T1W imaging at 3.0 T |
title_full_unstemmed | Differentiating T1a–T1b from T2 in gastric cancer lesions with three different measurement approaches based on contrast-enhanced T1W imaging at 3.0 T |
title_short | Differentiating T1a–T1b from T2 in gastric cancer lesions with three different measurement approaches based on contrast-enhanced T1W imaging at 3.0 T |
title_sort | differentiating t1a–t1b from t2 in gastric cancer lesions with three different measurement approaches based on contrast-enhanced t1w imaging at 3.0 t |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8480061/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34583642 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12880-021-00672-7 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT yuanyuan differentiatingt1at1bfromt2ingastriccancerlesionswiththreedifferentmeasurementapproachesbasedoncontrastenhancedt1wimagingat30t AT renshengnan differentiatingt1at1bfromt2ingastriccancerlesionswiththreedifferentmeasurementapproachesbasedoncontrastenhancedt1wimagingat30t AT wangtiegong differentiatingt1at1bfromt2ingastriccancerlesionswiththreedifferentmeasurementapproachesbasedoncontrastenhancedt1wimagingat30t AT shenfu differentiatingt1at1bfromt2ingastriccancerlesionswiththreedifferentmeasurementapproachesbasedoncontrastenhancedt1wimagingat30t AT haoqiang differentiatingt1at1bfromt2ingastriccancerlesionswiththreedifferentmeasurementapproachesbasedoncontrastenhancedt1wimagingat30t AT lujianping differentiatingt1at1bfromt2ingastriccancerlesionswiththreedifferentmeasurementapproachesbasedoncontrastenhancedt1wimagingat30t |