Title
Middle ear cholesteatoma: nonecho-planar diffusion-weighted MR imaging versus delayed gadolinium-enhanced T1-weighted MR imagingvalue in detection Middle ear cholesteatoma: nonecho-planar diffusion-weighted MR imaging versus delayed gadolinium-enhanced T1-weighted MR imagingvalue in detection
Author
Faculty/Department
Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences
Publication type
article
Publication
Easton, Pa ,
Subject
Human medicine
Source (journal)
Radiology. - Easton, Pa
Volume/pages
255(2010) :3 , p. 866-872
ISSN
0033-8419
ISI
000278038500026
Carrier
E
Target language
English (eng)
Full text (Publishers DOI)
Abstract
Purpose: To retrospectively compare nonecho-planar (non-EP) diffusion-weighted (DW) imaging, delayed gadolinium-enhanced T1-weighted magnetic resonance (MR) imaging, and the combination of both techniques in the evaluation of patients with cholesteatoma. Materials and Methods: This institutional review boardapproved study, for which the need to obtain informed consent was waived, included 57 patients clinically suspected of having a middle ear cholesteatoma without a history of surgery and 63 patients imaged before second-look surgery. Four blinded radiologists evaluated three sets of MR images: a set of delayed gadolinium-enhanced T1-weighted images, a set of non-EP DW images, and a set of both kinds of images. Overall sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value (NPV), and positive predictive value (PPV), as well as intra- and interobserver agreement, were assessed and compared among methods. To correct for the correlation between different readings, a generalized estimating equations logistic regression model was fitted. Results were compared with surgical results, which were regarded as the standard of reference. Results: Sensitivity, specificity, NPV, and PPV were significantly different between the three methods (P < .005). Sensitivity and specificity, respectively, were 56.7% and 67.6% with the delayed gadolinium-enhanced T1-weighted images and 82.6% and 87.2% with the non-EP DW images. Sensitivity for the combination of both kinds of images was 84.2%, while specificity was 88.2%. The overall PPV was 88.0% for delayed gadolinium-enhanced T1-weighted images, 96.0% for non-EP DW images, and 96.3%for the combination of both kinds of images. The overall NPV was 27.0% for delayed gadolinium-enhanced T1-weighted images, 56.5% for non-EP DW images, and 59.6% for the combination of both kinds of images. Conclusion: MR imaging for detection of middle ear cholesteatoma can be performed by using non-EP DW imaging sequences alone. Use of the non-EP DW imaging sequence combined with a delayed gadolinium-enhanced T1-weighted sequence yielded no significant increases in sensitivity, specificity, NPV, or PPV over the use of the non-EP DW imaging sequence alone.
E-info
https://repository.uantwerpen.be/docman/iruaauth/1c342f/1a6c32b55dc.pdf
http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=PARTNER_APP&SrcAuth=LinksAMR&KeyUT=WOS:000278038500026&DestLinkType=RelatedRecords&DestApp=ALL_WOS&UsrCustomerID=ef845e08c439e550330acc77c7d2d848
http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=PARTNER_APP&SrcAuth=LinksAMR&KeyUT=WOS:000278038500026&DestLinkType=FullRecord&DestApp=ALL_WOS&UsrCustomerID=ef845e08c439e550330acc77c7d2d848
http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=PARTNER_APP&SrcAuth=LinksAMR&KeyUT=WOS:000278038500026&DestLinkType=CitingArticles&DestApp=ALL_WOS&UsrCustomerID=ef845e08c439e550330acc77c7d2d848