The value of two apparent diffusion coefficient values in predicting the pathological types of moderately and poorly differentiated rectal adenocarcinoma
10.3969/j.issn.1002-1671.2023.12.015
- VernacularTitle:2种表观扩散系数值在预测中至低分化直肠腺癌病理类型中的价值
- Author:
Xin ZHENG
1
;
Hui ZHOU
;
Qiu TANG
;
Ming WEN
Author Information
1. 重庆市潼南区中医院放射科,重庆 402660
- Keywords:
magnetic resonance imaging;
apparent diffusion coefficient;
rectal adenocarcinoma;
histological grading
- From:
Journal of Practical Radiology
2023;39(12):1976-1979
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective To explore the apparent diffusion coefficient(ADC)value of rectal cancer lesions obtained by two measurement methods in predicting the pathological types of moderately and poorly differentiated rectal adenocarcinoma.Methods A total of 41 patients were divided into moderately differentiated group and poorly differentiated group according to degrees of differentiation.Direct measurement method and minimum ADC value method were used to measure the ADC value of the tumor,and the effectiveness of the ADC value in predicting moderately and poorly differentiated rectal adenocarcinoma was analyzed.Results The ADC values of rectal adenocarcinoma tumor obtained by two different measurement methods were different between the moderately and poorly differentiated groups(P＜0.01).The area under the curve(AUC)of the direct measurement method was 0.753,and the sensitivity and specificity were 96.67％and 63.64％,respectively.The AUC of the minimum ADC value method was 0.838,the sensitivity and specificity were 76.67％and 81.82％,respectively.The ADC value obtained by direct measurement method was positively correlated with its pathological characteristics(r=0.519,P＜0.01)and that by the minimum ADC value method was positively correlated with its pathological characteristics(r=0.391,P＜0.05).Conclusion The pathological types of moderately and poorly differentiated rectal adenocarcinoma is determined by ADC value.It is found that the direct measurement method has more greater comprehensive clinical value than the minimum ADC value method.
