Radiology
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Published online before print December 18, 2008, 10.1148/radiol.2502080849

(Radiology 2009;250:459.)

A more recent version of this article appeared on February 1, 2009
This Article
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
2502080849v1
250/2/459    most recent
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Braithwaite, A. C.
Right arrow Articles by Merkle, E. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Braithwaite, A. C.
Right arrow Articles by Merkle, E. M.
© RSNA, 2008

Gastrointestinal Imaging

Short- and Midterm Reproducibility of Apparent Diffusion Coefficient Measurements at 3.0-T Diffusion-weighted Imaging of the Abdomen1

Adam C. Braithwaite, MD, Brian M. Dale, PhD, Daniel T. Boll, MD, and Elmar M. Merkle, MD

1 From the Department of Radiology, Duke University Medical Center, Erwin Rd, Durham, NC 27710 (A.C.B., D.T.B., E.M.M.); and Siemens Medical Solutions, Cary, NC (B.M.D.). Received May 14, 2008; revision requested June 30; revision received July 30; accepted August 8; final version accepted August 29. Supported by Siemens Medical Solutions, Malvern, Pa. Address correspondence to E.M.M. (e-mail: elmar.merkle{at}duke.edu).

Purpose: To test the hypothesis that there is no significant variability in apparent diffusion coefficients (ADCs) at assessment of the short- and midterm reproducibility of ADC measurements in a healthy population.

Materials and Methods: Twenty healthy male volunteers were enrolled in this prospective institutional review board–approved study after they provided written informed consent. A 3.0-T magnetic resonance (MR) system was used to perform five axial diffusion-weighted (DW) abdominal acquisitions (session 1). A mean of 147 days ± 20 (standard deviation) later, 16 of the 20 volunteers were imaged again with use of the same protocol and MR system (session 2). The mean ADCs for three regions of interest (ROIs) in five anatomic locations (right hepatic lobe, spleen, and head, body, and tail of pancreas) were calculated. The coefficient of variation (CV, equal to standard deviation divided by mean) was calculated for each subject, session, and anatomic location. The ADC and CV data were then analyzed by using repeated-measures analysis of variance.

Results: There were significant differences (P < .001) in mean ADCs among the five anatomic locations. There were no significant differences in ADCs among the various repeated sequence acquisitions or the three ROIs. There were no significant differences in ADCs between imaging sessions 1 and 2. ADCs were fairly stable over the midterm within a given individual. Finally, there were no significant differences in resulting CVs between the imaging sessions or anatomic locations. The mean CV for ADC measurement reproducibility was 14% (95% confidence interval: 13%, 15%).

Conclusion: The mean CV for short- and midterm ADC reproducibility was 14% at abdominal DW imaging. Treatment effects of less than approximately 27% (change in ADC divided by pretreatment ADC) will not be clinically detectable with confidence with one acquisition in a single individual.

© RSNA, 2008