OBJECTIVES: To establish the most common image interpretation pitfalls for non-expert readers using diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) to assess response to chemoradiotherapy in patients with rectal cancer and to explore the use of these pitfalls in an expert teaching setting. METHODS: Two independent non-expert readers (R1 and R2) scored the restaging DW MRI scans (b1,000 DWI, in conjunction with ADC maps and T2-W MRI scans for anatomical reference) in 100 patients for the likelihood of a complete response versus residual tumour using a five-point confidence score. The readers received expert feedback and the final response outcome for each case. The supervising expert documented any potential interpretation errors/pitfalls discussed for each case to identify the most common pitfalls. RESULTS: The most common pitfalls were the interpretation of low signal on the ADC map, small susceptibility artefacts, T2 shine-through effects, suboptimal sequence angulation and collapsed rectal wall. Diagnostic performance (area under the ROC curve) was 0.78 (R1) and 0.77 (R2) in the first 50 patients and 0.85 (R1) and 0.85 (R2) in the final 50 patients.
Diffusion-weighted MRI to assess response to chemoradiotherapy in rectal cancer: main interpretation pitfalls and their use for teaching
Delli Pizzi, Andrea;
2017-01-01
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To establish the most common image interpretation pitfalls for non-expert readers using diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) to assess response to chemoradiotherapy in patients with rectal cancer and to explore the use of these pitfalls in an expert teaching setting. METHODS: Two independent non-expert readers (R1 and R2) scored the restaging DW MRI scans (b1,000 DWI, in conjunction with ADC maps and T2-W MRI scans for anatomical reference) in 100 patients for the likelihood of a complete response versus residual tumour using a five-point confidence score. The readers received expert feedback and the final response outcome for each case. The supervising expert documented any potential interpretation errors/pitfalls discussed for each case to identify the most common pitfalls. RESULTS: The most common pitfalls were the interpretation of low signal on the ADC map, small susceptibility artefacts, T2 shine-through effects, suboptimal sequence angulation and collapsed rectal wall. Diagnostic performance (area under the ROC curve) was 0.78 (R1) and 0.77 (R2) in the first 50 patients and 0.85 (R1) and 0.85 (R2) in the final 50 patients.File | Dimensione | Formato | |
---|---|---|---|
Lambregts2017_Article_Diffusion-weightedMRIToAssessR.pdf
Solo gestori archivio
Tipologia:
PDF editoriale
Dimensione
904.09 kB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
904.09 kB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri Richiedi una copia |
Learning curve and pitfalls_v2 (co-auteurs_plain text).pdf
accesso aperto
Tipologia:
Documento in Pre-print
Dimensione
1.86 MB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
1.86 MB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri |
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.