Cargando…
Impact of measurement method on interobserver variability of apparent diffusion coefficient of lesions in prostate MRI
PURPOSE: To compare the inter-observer variability of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values of prostate lesions measured by 2D-region of interest (ROI) with and without specific measurement instruction. METHODS: Forty lesions in 40 patients who underwent prostate MR followed by targeted prosta...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Public Library of Science
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9126398/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35604891 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0268829 |
Sumario: | PURPOSE: To compare the inter-observer variability of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values of prostate lesions measured by 2D-region of interest (ROI) with and without specific measurement instruction. METHODS: Forty lesions in 40 patients who underwent prostate MR followed by targeted prostate biopsy were evaluated. A multi-reader study (10 readers) was performed to assess the agreement of ADC values between 2D-ROI without specific instruction and 2D-ROI with specific instruction to place a 9-pixel size 2D-ROI covering the lowest ADC area. The computer script generated multiple overlapping 9-pixel 2D-ROIs within a 3D-ROI encompassing the entire lesion placed by a single reader. The lowest mean ADC values from each 2D-small-ROI were used as reference values. Inter-observer agreement was assessed using the Bland-Altman plot. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was assessed between ADC values measured by 10 readers and the computer-calculated reference values. RESULTS: Ten lesions were benign, 6 were Gleason score 6 prostate carcinoma (PCa), and 24 were clinically significant PCa. The mean±SD ADC reference value by 9-pixel-ROI was 733 ± 186 (10(−6) mm(2)/s). The 95% limits of agreement of ADC values among readers were better with specific instruction (±112) than those without (±205). ICC between reader-measured ADC values and computer-calculated reference values ranged from 0.736–0.949 with specific instruction and 0.349–0.919 without specific instruction. CONCLUSION: Interobserver agreement of ADC values can be improved by indicating a measurement method (use of a specific ROI size covering the lowest ADC area). |
---|