DWI and ADC value versus ADC ratio in the characterization of solid renal masses: radiologic-pathologic correlation

Abstract Background Renal masses are becoming an increasingly common finding on cross-sectional images. Characterization of the nature of the lesion either neoplastic or not, benign or malignant as well as further subtype characterization is becoming an important factor in determining management pla...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Mohamed Samir Shaaban, Viviane George Adly Ayad, Mohamed Sharafeldeen, Mona A. Salem, M. A. Atta, Adel A. Ramadan
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: SpringerOpen 2021-08-01
Series:The Egyptian Journal of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1186/s43055-021-00565-3
id doaj-448f1a2a8cc9416dbd3de4275325ef26
record_format Article
spelling doaj-448f1a2a8cc9416dbd3de4275325ef262021-08-15T11:31:30ZengSpringerOpenThe Egyptian Journal of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine2090-47622021-08-0152111310.1186/s43055-021-00565-3DWI and ADC value versus ADC ratio in the characterization of solid renal masses: radiologic-pathologic correlationMohamed Samir Shaaban0Viviane George Adly Ayad1Mohamed Sharafeldeen2Mona A. Salem3M. A. Atta4Adel A. Ramadan5Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Faculty of Medicine, Alexandria UniversityDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Faculty of Medicine, Alexandria UniversityDepartment of Urology, Faculty of Medicine, Alexandria UniversityDepartment of Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, Alexandria UniversityDepartment of Urology, Faculty of Medicine, Alexandria UniversityDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Faculty of Medicine, Alexandria UniversityAbstract Background Renal masses are becoming an increasingly common finding on cross-sectional images. Characterization of the nature of the lesion either neoplastic or not, benign or malignant as well as further subtype characterization is becoming an important factor in determining management plan. The purpose of our study with to assess the sensitivity and specificity of both ADC mean value and ADC ratio in such characterization along with the calculation of different cutoff values to differentiate between different varieties, using pathological data as the main gold standard for diagnosis. Results Our study included 50 patients with a total of 72 masses. A final diagnosis was reached in 69 masses by pathological examination and three masses had clinical and laboratory signs of infection. We had a total of 49 malignant lesions (68%) and 23 benign lesions (32%). The ADC value of ccRCC (1.4 × 10−3 mm2/s) was significantly higher than all other renal masses. A cutoff ADC value of > 1.1 and a cutoff ADC ratio of > 0.56 can be used to differentiate between clear cell renal cell carcinoma and other lesions and an ADC value of < 0.8 and an ADC ratio of ≤ 0.56 to differentiate papillary renal cell carcinoma from other masses. There was no statistically significant ADC value to differentiate between benign and malignant lesions but a statistically significant ADC ratio (> 0.52) was reached. Conclusion ADC value and ADC ratio can be used as an adjunct tool in the characterization of different renal masses, with ADC ratio having a higher sensitivity, which can affect the prognosis and management of the patient.https://doi.org/10.1186/s43055-021-00565-3KidneyNeoplasmDiffusion-weighted imagingADC valueADC ratio
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Mohamed Samir Shaaban
Viviane George Adly Ayad
Mohamed Sharafeldeen
Mona A. Salem
M. A. Atta
Adel A. Ramadan
spellingShingle Mohamed Samir Shaaban
Viviane George Adly Ayad
Mohamed Sharafeldeen
Mona A. Salem
M. A. Atta
Adel A. Ramadan
DWI and ADC value versus ADC ratio in the characterization of solid renal masses: radiologic-pathologic correlation
The Egyptian Journal of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine
Kidney
Neoplasm
Diffusion-weighted imaging
ADC value
ADC ratio
author_facet Mohamed Samir Shaaban
Viviane George Adly Ayad
Mohamed Sharafeldeen
Mona A. Salem
M. A. Atta
Adel A. Ramadan
author_sort Mohamed Samir Shaaban
title DWI and ADC value versus ADC ratio in the characterization of solid renal masses: radiologic-pathologic correlation
title_short DWI and ADC value versus ADC ratio in the characterization of solid renal masses: radiologic-pathologic correlation
title_full DWI and ADC value versus ADC ratio in the characterization of solid renal masses: radiologic-pathologic correlation
title_fullStr DWI and ADC value versus ADC ratio in the characterization of solid renal masses: radiologic-pathologic correlation
title_full_unstemmed DWI and ADC value versus ADC ratio in the characterization of solid renal masses: radiologic-pathologic correlation
title_sort dwi and adc value versus adc ratio in the characterization of solid renal masses: radiologic-pathologic correlation
publisher SpringerOpen
series The Egyptian Journal of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine
issn 2090-4762
publishDate 2021-08-01
description Abstract Background Renal masses are becoming an increasingly common finding on cross-sectional images. Characterization of the nature of the lesion either neoplastic or not, benign or malignant as well as further subtype characterization is becoming an important factor in determining management plan. The purpose of our study with to assess the sensitivity and specificity of both ADC mean value and ADC ratio in such characterization along with the calculation of different cutoff values to differentiate between different varieties, using pathological data as the main gold standard for diagnosis. Results Our study included 50 patients with a total of 72 masses. A final diagnosis was reached in 69 masses by pathological examination and three masses had clinical and laboratory signs of infection. We had a total of 49 malignant lesions (68%) and 23 benign lesions (32%). The ADC value of ccRCC (1.4 × 10−3 mm2/s) was significantly higher than all other renal masses. A cutoff ADC value of > 1.1 and a cutoff ADC ratio of > 0.56 can be used to differentiate between clear cell renal cell carcinoma and other lesions and an ADC value of < 0.8 and an ADC ratio of ≤ 0.56 to differentiate papillary renal cell carcinoma from other masses. There was no statistically significant ADC value to differentiate between benign and malignant lesions but a statistically significant ADC ratio (> 0.52) was reached. Conclusion ADC value and ADC ratio can be used as an adjunct tool in the characterization of different renal masses, with ADC ratio having a higher sensitivity, which can affect the prognosis and management of the patient.
topic Kidney
Neoplasm
Diffusion-weighted imaging
ADC value
ADC ratio
url https://doi.org/10.1186/s43055-021-00565-3
work_keys_str_mv AT mohamedsamirshaaban dwiandadcvalueversusadcratiointhecharacterizationofsolidrenalmassesradiologicpathologiccorrelation
AT vivianegeorgeadlyayad dwiandadcvalueversusadcratiointhecharacterizationofsolidrenalmassesradiologicpathologiccorrelation
AT mohamedsharafeldeen dwiandadcvalueversusadcratiointhecharacterizationofsolidrenalmassesradiologicpathologiccorrelation
AT monaasalem dwiandadcvalueversusadcratiointhecharacterizationofsolidrenalmassesradiologicpathologiccorrelation
AT maatta dwiandadcvalueversusadcratiointhecharacterizationofsolidrenalmassesradiologicpathologiccorrelation
AT adelaramadan dwiandadcvalueversusadcratiointhecharacterizationofsolidrenalmassesradiologicpathologiccorrelation
_version_ 1721206626044608512