Skip to main content
Top
Published in: European Radiology 5/2019

01-05-2019 | Editorial

Variability in quantitative diffusion-weighted MR imaging (DWI) across different scanners and imaging sites: is there a potential consensus that can help reducing the limits of expected bias?

Author: Frederic Carsten Schmeel

Published in: European Radiology | Issue 5/2019

Login to get access

Abstract

Key Points

Variability of ADC measurements may be substantial across different MRI scanners and imaging sites.
DWI protocol standardization and increased awareness of frequent sources of error can help reducing the limits of expected bias.
Focusing on ADC change and normalized ADC values rather than on absolute measurements can facilitate consistent use of ADC in multi-center studies.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Padhani AR, Liu G, Koh DM et al (2009) Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging as a cancer biomarker: consensus and recommendations. Neoplasia 11:102–125CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Padhani AR, Liu G, Koh DM et al (2009) Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging as a cancer biomarker: consensus and recommendations. Neoplasia 11:102–125CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
2.
go back to reference Donati OF, Chong D, Nanz D et al (2014) Diffusion-weighted MR imaging of upper abdominal organs: field strength and intervendor variability of apparent diffusion coefficients. Radiology 270:454–463CrossRefPubMed Donati OF, Chong D, Nanz D et al (2014) Diffusion-weighted MR imaging of upper abdominal organs: field strength and intervendor variability of apparent diffusion coefficients. Radiology 270:454–463CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Winfield JM, Collins DJ, Priest AN et al (2016) A framework for optimization of diffusion-weighted MRI protocols for large field-of-view abdominal-pelvic imaging in multicenter studies. Med Phys 43:95–110CrossRefPubMed Winfield JM, Collins DJ, Priest AN et al (2016) A framework for optimization of diffusion-weighted MRI protocols for large field-of-view abdominal-pelvic imaging in multicenter studies. Med Phys 43:95–110CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Sasaki M, Yamada K, Watanabe Y et al (2008) Variability in absolute apparent diffusion coefficient values across different platforms may be substantial: a multivendor, multi-institutional comparison study. Radiology 249:624–630CrossRefPubMed Sasaki M, Yamada K, Watanabe Y et al (2008) Variability in absolute apparent diffusion coefficient values across different platforms may be substantial: a multivendor, multi-institutional comparison study. Radiology 249:624–630CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Asselin MC, O’Connor JP, Boellaard R, Thacker NA, Jackson A (2012) Quantifying heterogeneity in human tumours using MRI and PET. Eur J Cancer 48:447–455CrossRefPubMed Asselin MC, O’Connor JP, Boellaard R, Thacker NA, Jackson A (2012) Quantifying heterogeneity in human tumours using MRI and PET. Eur J Cancer 48:447–455CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Malyarenko D, Galbán CJ, Londy FJ et al (2013) Multi-system repeatability and reproducibility of apparent diffusion coefficient measurement using an ice-water phantom. J Magn Reson Imaging 37:1238–1246CrossRefPubMed Malyarenko D, Galbán CJ, Londy FJ et al (2013) Multi-system repeatability and reproducibility of apparent diffusion coefficient measurement using an ice-water phantom. J Magn Reson Imaging 37:1238–1246CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Taouli B, Sandberg A, Stemmer A et al (2009) Diffusion-weighted imaging of the liver: comparison of navigator triggered and breathhold acquisitions. J Magn Reson Imaging 30:561–568CrossRefPubMed Taouli B, Sandberg A, Stemmer A et al (2009) Diffusion-weighted imaging of the liver: comparison of navigator triggered and breathhold acquisitions. J Magn Reson Imaging 30:561–568CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Lambregts DM, Beets GL, Maas M et al (2011) Tumour ADC measurements in rectal cancer: effect of ROI methods on ADC values and interobserver variability. Eur Radiol 21:2567–2574CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Lambregts DM, Beets GL, Maas M et al (2011) Tumour ADC measurements in rectal cancer: effect of ROI methods on ADC values and interobserver variability. Eur Radiol 21:2567–2574CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
10.
go back to reference Pathak R, Ragheb H, Thacker NA et al (2017) A data-driven statistical model that estimates measurement uncertainty improves interpretation of ADC reproducibility: a multi-site study of liver metastases. Sci Rep 26:14084CrossRef Pathak R, Ragheb H, Thacker NA et al (2017) A data-driven statistical model that estimates measurement uncertainty improves interpretation of ADC reproducibility: a multi-site study of liver metastases. Sci Rep 26:14084CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Variability in quantitative diffusion-weighted MR imaging (DWI) across different scanners and imaging sites: is there a potential consensus that can help reducing the limits of expected bias?
Author
Frederic Carsten Schmeel
Publication date
01-05-2019
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
European Radiology / Issue 5/2019
Print ISSN: 0938-7994
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1084
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-018-5866-4

Other articles of this Issue 5/2019

European Radiology 5/2019 Go to the issue