The effect of gadolinium-based intravenous contrast in the initial characterization of musculoskeletal soft tissue tumors

IF 1.5 Q3 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING Current Problems in Diagnostic Radiology Pub Date : 2024-03-08 DOI:10.1067/j.cpradiol.2024.03.002
Jonathan Wehrend MD, David Gimarc MD, Zachary R Ashwell MD, Alexandria Jensen PhD, Nancy Major MD, Corey K Ho
{"title":"The effect of gadolinium-based intravenous contrast in the initial characterization of musculoskeletal soft tissue tumors","authors":"Jonathan Wehrend MD,&nbsp;David Gimarc MD,&nbsp;Zachary R Ashwell MD,&nbsp;Alexandria Jensen PhD,&nbsp;Nancy Major MD,&nbsp;Corey K Ho","doi":"10.1067/j.cpradiol.2024.03.002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>To determine if gadolinium-based contrast agents increase the sensitivity, specificity or reader confidence of malignant potential in musculoskeletal soft tissue tumors.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Pre- and post-contrast MRI studies from 87 patients were read by three independent radiologists of different experience. Readers noted malignant potential and confidence in their diagnosis based on pre-contrast and post-contrast MRI studies. Statistical models assessed for agreement between MRI reader diagnosis and pathologic results as well as analyzing effects of contrast on reader confidence. Inter- and intra-observer variabilities of malignant potential were also calculated.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>87 patients (48 benign and 39 malignant; mean [± SD] age 51 ± 17.9 and 57.1 ± 17.1, respectively) were evaluated. For all readers, pre-contrast and post-contrast sensitivities were 68.1 % and 70.6 % while pre-contrast and post-contrast specificities were 84.6 % and 83.8 %, respectively without significant change (p=0.88). There was not a significant association with the use of contrast and prediction of malignant potential with or without the resident reader (p=0.65 and p=0.82). Use of contrast was significantly associated with higher levels of reader confidence (p=0.02) for all readers. Inter- and intra-observer variabilities were in good agreement (W = 0.77 and 0.70).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>The addition of a post-contrast sequence increased reader confidence in their diagnosis without a corresponding significant increase in accurate prediction of malignant potential.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":51617,"journal":{"name":"Current Problems in Diagnostic Radiology","volume":"53 4","pages":"Pages 470-476"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Problems in Diagnostic Radiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0363018824000495","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective

To determine if gadolinium-based contrast agents increase the sensitivity, specificity or reader confidence of malignant potential in musculoskeletal soft tissue tumors.

Methods

Pre- and post-contrast MRI studies from 87 patients were read by three independent radiologists of different experience. Readers noted malignant potential and confidence in their diagnosis based on pre-contrast and post-contrast MRI studies. Statistical models assessed for agreement between MRI reader diagnosis and pathologic results as well as analyzing effects of contrast on reader confidence. Inter- and intra-observer variabilities of malignant potential were also calculated.

Results

87 patients (48 benign and 39 malignant; mean [± SD] age 51 ± 17.9 and 57.1 ± 17.1, respectively) were evaluated. For all readers, pre-contrast and post-contrast sensitivities were 68.1 % and 70.6 % while pre-contrast and post-contrast specificities were 84.6 % and 83.8 %, respectively without significant change (p=0.88). There was not a significant association with the use of contrast and prediction of malignant potential with or without the resident reader (p=0.65 and p=0.82). Use of contrast was significantly associated with higher levels of reader confidence (p=0.02) for all readers. Inter- and intra-observer variabilities were in good agreement (W = 0.77 and 0.70).

Conclusion

The addition of a post-contrast sequence increased reader confidence in their diagnosis without a corresponding significant increase in accurate prediction of malignant potential.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
钆基静脉注射造影剂对初步确定肌肉骨骼软组织肿瘤特征的影响。
目的确定钆类造影剂是否能提高读者对肌肉骨骼软组织肿瘤恶性可能性的敏感性、特异性或可信度:方法:由三位具有不同经验的独立放射科医生对 87 名患者的对比前和对比后 MRI 研究进行阅读。阅读者根据对比前和对比后的 MRI 研究结果指出恶性可能性和诊断信心。统计模型评估了 MRI 阅读器诊断与病理结果之间的一致性,并分析了对比度对阅读器信心的影响。此外,还计算了恶性可能性的观察者间和观察者内变异性:评估了 87 名患者(48 名良性和 39 名恶性;平均 [± SD] 年龄分别为 51 ± 17.9 和 57.1 ± 17.1)。所有读者对比前和对比后的敏感性分别为 68.1% 和 70.6%,对比前和对比后的特异性分别为 84.6% 和 83.8%,无显著变化(P=0.88)。无论是否有常驻阅读器,使用对比剂与预测恶性可能性都没有明显关联(p=0.65 和 p=0.82)。在所有读者中,对比剂的使用与读者信心水平的提高明显相关(p=0.02)。观察者之间和观察者内部的变异性非常一致(W=0.77 和 0.70):结论:增加对比后序列可提高读者的诊断信心,但对恶性可能性的准确预测却没有相应的显著提高。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Current Problems in Diagnostic Radiology
Current Problems in Diagnostic Radiology RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING-
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
113
审稿时长
46 days
期刊介绍: Current Problems in Diagnostic Radiology covers important and controversial topics in radiology. Each issue presents important viewpoints from leading radiologists. High-quality reproductions of radiographs, CT scans, MR images, and sonograms clearly depict what is being described in each article. Also included are valuable updates relevant to other areas of practice, such as medical-legal issues or archiving systems. With new multi-topic format and image-intensive style, Current Problems in Diagnostic Radiology offers an outstanding, time-saving investigation into current topics most relevant to radiologists.
期刊最新文献
Editorial Board Table of Contents Gender equality in radiology: 3 steps worth taking Breast Imaging: what women & healthcare professionals need to know #HeForShe in radiology: A toolkit for radiologists
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1