Measurement of apparent diffusion coefficient in discrimination of benign and malignant axillary lymph nodes.

Ebru Yılmaz, Berrin Erok, Ali Önder Atca
Author Information
  1. Ebru Yılmaz: Sarıyer Hamidiye Etfal Education and Research Hospital, İstanbul, Turkey.
  2. Berrin Erok: Cihanbeyli State Hospital, Konya, Turkey.
  3. Ali Önder Atca: Altınbas University School of Medicine Bahcelievler Medical Park Hospital, İstanbul, Turkey.

Abstract

PURPOSE: We aimed to determine the contribution of the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) value in the detection of axillary lymph node metastasis.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Breast magnetic resonance of 58 patients, performed in the radiology clinic of our hospital between 2015 and 2017 were examined retrospectively, and 43 lymph nodes in 43 patients were included in the study. They were evaluated morphologically on T1W and T2W sequences, and the lymph nodes showing rounded shape, focal or diffuse cortical thickness of more than 3 mm, and partial or total effacement of fatty hilum were included in the study. Subsequently, their ADC values were measured.
RESULTS: There were 43 lymph nodes, 20 of which were malignant and 23 of which were benign. While the mean ADC value of malignant axillary lymph nodes was 0.749 10 mm/s (0.48-1.342), it was 0.982 10 mm/s (0.552-1.986) for benign lymph nodes. When the ADC cut-off value was taken as ≤ 0.753 × 10 mm/s, its discrimination power between benign and malignant axillary lymph nodes was as follows: sensitivity - 60%; specificity - 91.3%; accuracy - 76.7%; positive predictive value - 85.7%; and negative predictive value - 72.4%.
CONCLUSIONS: There was no significant difference between mean ADC value of 12 lymphadenopathies (LAP) associated with inflammatory breast diseases (granulomatous mastitis and acute suppurative mastitis) and mean ADC value of metastatic lymph nodes. However, the ADC value of lymph nodes showing thickened cortex due to systemic inflammatory diseases was over 1, and there was a statistically significant difference when compared with metastatic lymph nodes.

Keywords

References

  1. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2007 Jun;188(6):1622-35 [PMID: 17515386]
  2. Clin Radiol. 2013 Jul;68(7):704-7 [PMID: 23518495]
  3. J Clin Oncol. 2008 Oct 10;26(29):4746-51 [PMID: 18695254]
  4. Radiology. 2004 Aug;232(2):585-91 [PMID: 15205478]
  5. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2011 Jan;196(1):210-7 [PMID: 21178069]
  6. Magn Reson Imaging. 2014 Dec;32(10):1230-6 [PMID: 25072504]
  7. Magn Reson Med Sci. 2005;4(1):35-42 [PMID: 16127252]
  8. Korean J Radiol. 2012 Jul-Aug;13(4):458-66 [PMID: 22778568]
  9. World J Surg. 2012 Jan;36(1):46-54 [PMID: 22037691]
  10. PLoS One. 2014 Jan 16;9(1):e84038 [PMID: 24454715]
  11. Diagn Interv Radiol. 2013 Nov-Dec;19(6):457-62 [PMID: 24004972]
  12. NMR Biomed. 2010 May;23(4):399-405 [PMID: 20131313]
  13. Radiology. 2012 Feb;262(2):425-34 [PMID: 22143924]
  14. World J Surg. 2001 Jun;25(6):767-72 [PMID: 11376414]
  15. Magn Reson Med Sci. 2007;6(1):21-7 [PMID: 17510539]
  16. Eur J Radiol. 2013 Dec;82(12):2194-8 [PMID: 23993142]
  17. Zhonghua Zhong Liu Za Zhi. 2010 May;32(5):377-81 [PMID: 20723438]
  18. Radiographics. 2011 Jul-Aug;31(4):1059-84 [PMID: 21768239]
  19. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2006 May;186(5):1342-8 [PMID: 16632729]
  20. Radiology. 2010 Jul;256(1):64-73 [PMID: 20574085]
  21. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. ;18(5):1265-1270 [PMID: 28610412]
  22. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2011 May;196(5):W641-7 [PMID: 21512057]
  23. Cancer. 1983 Nov 1;52(9):1551-7 [PMID: 6352003]
  24. Breast. 2009 Apr;18(2):119-22 [PMID: 19297159]
  25. Ann Surg. 2005 Jul;242(1):1-6; discussion 7-9 [PMID: 15973094]
  26. Br J Radiol. 2018 May;91(1085):20170706 [PMID: 29388800]
  27. Breast Cancer. 2016 May;23(3):525-32 [PMID: 25763535]
  28. Acta Radiol. 2014 Oct;55(8):909-16 [PMID: 24234236]
  29. Radiology. 2009 Apr;251(1):134-46 [PMID: 19251938]
  30. Radiology. 2011 Nov;261(2):573-81 [PMID: 21852566]

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0lymphnodesADCvalueaxillary0-malignantbenignapparentdiffusioncoefficient43mean10mm/spatientsincludedstudyshowingdiscrimination7%predictivesignificantdifferenceLAPinflammatorybreastdiseasesmastitismetastaticPURPOSE:aimeddeterminecontributiondetectionnodemetastasisMATERIALANDMETHODS:Breastmagneticresonance58performedradiologyclinichospital20152017examinedretrospectivelyevaluatedmorphologicallyT1WT2Wsequencesroundedshapefocaldiffusecorticalthickness3mmpartialtotaleffacementfattyhilumSubsequentlyvaluesmeasuredRESULTS:202374948-1342982552-1986cut-offtaken753×powerfollows:sensitivity60%specificity913%accuracy76positive85negative724%CONCLUSIONS:12lymphadenopathiesassociatedgranulomatousacutesuppurativeHoweverthickenedcortexduesystemic1statisticallycomparedMeasurementcancerdiffusion-weightedimagingDWI

Similar Articles

Cited By (3)