Magnetic resonance imaging of focal organizing pneumonia: differential diagnosis with peripheral lung carcinoma.

IF 1.1 4区 医学 Q3 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING Acta radiologica Pub Date : 2025-01-26 DOI:10.1177/02841851241309007
Hai-Feng Duan, Shan Dang, Nan Yu, Yuanyuan Chen, Dong Han, Yong Yu, Xiaoyi Duan
{"title":"Magnetic resonance imaging of focal organizing pneumonia: differential diagnosis with peripheral lung carcinoma.","authors":"Hai-Feng Duan, Shan Dang, Nan Yu, Yuanyuan Chen, Dong Han, Yong Yu, Xiaoyi Duan","doi":"10.1177/02841851241309007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Computed tomography (CT) is the most common way to evaluate focal organizing pneumonia (FOP); however, sometimes it is difficult to differentiate FOP and peripheral lung carcinoma (PLC).</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To clarify the MRI manifestation of FOP and the value of MR in the differential diagnosis of FOP and PLC in comparison to CT.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>Chest MR (3D T1WI, T2WI TSE, DWI) and CT images of 72 patients (50 men: mean age=64.7 years; 22 women: mean age=64.9 years; 36 FOPs and 36 PLCs) were retrospectively analyzed. Two experienced radiologists reviewed all CT and MR images and graded CT and MR findings completely independently. The apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) value was measured by the two radiologists independently. Paired sample <i>t</i>-test and Fisher's exact test were used to compare the ADC values and MR features between the two groups. Finally, the ROC curve was used to evaluate the diagnostic efficiency of MR.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The ADC value of FOP was larger than PLC (<i>P</i> < 0.05). Necrosis, abscess cavity, broad contact with the pleura, and focal pleural effusion were more common in FOP (<i>P</i> < 0.05). PLC patients showed more (<i>P</i> < 0.05) irregular margins, pleural indentation, and lymphadenopathy. ADC value can be used to differentiate FOP and PLC, and the cutoff value is 1048 × 10<sup>-6</sup>mm<sup>2</sup>/s. The sensitivity, specificity, AUC and accuracy of diagnosis of CT, MR was (61.1%, 88.9%, 0.820, and 75%) vs (72.2%, 97.2%, 0.950, and 93.1%), respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Compared with CT, MR can increase radiologists' confidence in the differential diagnosis of FOP and PLC.</p>","PeriodicalId":7143,"journal":{"name":"Acta radiologica","volume":" ","pages":"2841851241309007"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta radiologica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/02841851241309007","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","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

Background: Computed tomography (CT) is the most common way to evaluate focal organizing pneumonia (FOP); however, sometimes it is difficult to differentiate FOP and peripheral lung carcinoma (PLC).

Purpose: To clarify the MRI manifestation of FOP and the value of MR in the differential diagnosis of FOP and PLC in comparison to CT.

Material and methods: Chest MR (3D T1WI, T2WI TSE, DWI) and CT images of 72 patients (50 men: mean age=64.7 years; 22 women: mean age=64.9 years; 36 FOPs and 36 PLCs) were retrospectively analyzed. Two experienced radiologists reviewed all CT and MR images and graded CT and MR findings completely independently. The apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) value was measured by the two radiologists independently. Paired sample t-test and Fisher's exact test were used to compare the ADC values and MR features between the two groups. Finally, the ROC curve was used to evaluate the diagnostic efficiency of MR.

Results: The ADC value of FOP was larger than PLC (P < 0.05). Necrosis, abscess cavity, broad contact with the pleura, and focal pleural effusion were more common in FOP (P < 0.05). PLC patients showed more (P < 0.05) irregular margins, pleural indentation, and lymphadenopathy. ADC value can be used to differentiate FOP and PLC, and the cutoff value is 1048 × 10-6mm2/s. The sensitivity, specificity, AUC and accuracy of diagnosis of CT, MR was (61.1%, 88.9%, 0.820, and 75%) vs (72.2%, 97.2%, 0.950, and 93.1%), respectively.

Conclusion: Compared with CT, MR can increase radiologists' confidence in the differential diagnosis of FOP and PLC.

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
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Acta radiologica
Acta radiologica 医学-核医学
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
170
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Acta Radiologica publishes articles on all aspects of radiology, from clinical radiology to experimental work. It is known for articles based on experimental work and contrast media research, giving priority to scientific original papers. The distinguished international editorial board also invite review articles, short communications and technical and instrumental notes.
期刊最新文献
Hip-spine syndrome from the perspective of radiology: correlations between hip joint disease and lumbar spine MRI findings. The expression of repulsive guidance molecule a in the rat brain and the diffusion tensor imaging evaluation for crossed cerebellar diaschisis. Multiple microcysts and clivus invasion diagnose T-box pituitary transcription factor 19 lineage adenomas in non-functioning pituitary adenomas. Comparative diagnostic performance of 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT and 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/MRI in detecting biochemical recurrent bone metastasis in prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Magnetic resonance imaging of focal organizing pneumonia: differential diagnosis with peripheral lung carcinoma.
×
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