An international survey of diffusion and perfusion magnetic resonance imaging implementation in the head and neck.

IF 4.7 2区 医学 Q1 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING European Radiology Pub Date : 2025-08-01 Epub Date: 2025-02-04 DOI:10.1007/s00330-025-11370-1
Steve Connor, Alexander Christoforou, Philip Touska, Soraya Robinson, Nancy J Fischbein, Pim de Graaf, Anne R J Péporté, Jussi Hirvonen, Darka Hadnadjev Šimonji, Gloria J Guzmán Pérez-Carrillo, Xin Cynthia Wu, Christine Glastonbury, Kristine M Mosier, Ashok Srinivasan
{"title":"An international survey of diffusion and perfusion magnetic resonance imaging implementation in the head and neck.","authors":"Steve Connor, Alexander Christoforou, Philip Touska, Soraya Robinson, Nancy J Fischbein, Pim de Graaf, Anne R J Péporté, Jussi Hirvonen, Darka Hadnadjev Šimonji, Gloria J Guzmán Pérez-Carrillo, Xin Cynthia Wu, Christine Glastonbury, Kristine M Mosier, Ashok Srinivasan","doi":"10.1007/s00330-025-11370-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The goal of this international survey was to understand how diffusion (DWI) and perfusion imaging (PWI) are being applied to clinical head and neck imaging.</p><p><strong>Methods and materials: </strong>An online questionnaire focusing on acquisition, clinical indications, analysis, and reporting of qualitative DWI (QlDWI), quantitative DWI (QnDWI) and dynamic contrast-enhanced PWI (DCE-PWI) in the head and neck was circulated to members of the American Society of Head and Neck Radiology (ASHNR) and European Society of Head and Neck Radiology (ESHNR) over a 3-month period. Descriptive statistics and group comparisons were calculated with SPSS® v27.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were 294 unique respondents (17.6% response rate) from 256 institutions (182 ESHNR, 74 ASHNR). DWI was routinely acquired for some head and neck indications at 95.7% of the respondents' institutions, with 92.5% of radiologists interpreting QlDWI but only 36.7% analysing QnDWI. QlDWI was most frequently applied to primary mucosal masses or the middle ear, whilst QnDWI was routinely used to distinguish tumour histologies, and primary or recurrent carcinoma. DCE-PWI was routinely acquired at 53.6% of institutions and used by 40.8% of respondents, however, there was no clinical scenario in which it was routinely applied by most users. DCE-PWI analysis methods varied, with time-intensity curve classifications being the most frequently reported. Lack of standardisation was identified as a key reason for not implementing QnDWI, whilst numerous factors prevented the adoption of DCE-PWI.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>There is widespread routine interpretation of QlDWI by head and neck radiologists, but there is considerable variation in the application and analysis of head and neck QnDWI and DCE-PWI.</p><p><strong>Key points: </strong>Question How are diffusion (DWI) and dynamic contrast-enhanced perfusion imaging (DCE-PWI) being utilised by head and neck radiologists across a wide range of practices? Findings An international survey demonstrated widespread routine interpretation of qualitative DWI but variable application and analysis of quantitative DWI and DCE-PWI with numerous barriers to implementation. Clinical relevance The survey results will aid discussion on how to standardise and optimally disseminate these MRI techniques in day-to-day practice. More focused education and resource allocation may be required to accelerate the adoption of quantitative DWI and DCE-PWI.</p>","PeriodicalId":12076,"journal":{"name":"European Radiology","volume":" ","pages":"5110-5120"},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12226617/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Radiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-025-11370-1","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/4 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: The goal of this international survey was to understand how diffusion (DWI) and perfusion imaging (PWI) are being applied to clinical head and neck imaging.

Methods and materials: An online questionnaire focusing on acquisition, clinical indications, analysis, and reporting of qualitative DWI (QlDWI), quantitative DWI (QnDWI) and dynamic contrast-enhanced PWI (DCE-PWI) in the head and neck was circulated to members of the American Society of Head and Neck Radiology (ASHNR) and European Society of Head and Neck Radiology (ESHNR) over a 3-month period. Descriptive statistics and group comparisons were calculated with SPSS® v27.

Results: There were 294 unique respondents (17.6% response rate) from 256 institutions (182 ESHNR, 74 ASHNR). DWI was routinely acquired for some head and neck indications at 95.7% of the respondents' institutions, with 92.5% of radiologists interpreting QlDWI but only 36.7% analysing QnDWI. QlDWI was most frequently applied to primary mucosal masses or the middle ear, whilst QnDWI was routinely used to distinguish tumour histologies, and primary or recurrent carcinoma. DCE-PWI was routinely acquired at 53.6% of institutions and used by 40.8% of respondents, however, there was no clinical scenario in which it was routinely applied by most users. DCE-PWI analysis methods varied, with time-intensity curve classifications being the most frequently reported. Lack of standardisation was identified as a key reason for not implementing QnDWI, whilst numerous factors prevented the adoption of DCE-PWI.

Conclusion: There is widespread routine interpretation of QlDWI by head and neck radiologists, but there is considerable variation in the application and analysis of head and neck QnDWI and DCE-PWI.

Key points: Question How are diffusion (DWI) and dynamic contrast-enhanced perfusion imaging (DCE-PWI) being utilised by head and neck radiologists across a wide range of practices? Findings An international survey demonstrated widespread routine interpretation of qualitative DWI but variable application and analysis of quantitative DWI and DCE-PWI with numerous barriers to implementation. Clinical relevance The survey results will aid discussion on how to standardise and optimally disseminate these MRI techniques in day-to-day practice. More focused education and resource allocation may be required to accelerate the adoption of quantitative DWI and DCE-PWI.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

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
扩散和灌注磁共振成像在头颈部实施的国际调查。
目的:这项国际调查的目的是了解弥散成像(DWI)和灌注成像(PWI)在临床头颈部成像中的应用。方法和材料:在3个月的时间里,将一份在线调查问卷分发给美国头颈部放射学会(ASHNR)和欧洲头颈部放射学会(ESHNR)的成员,重点是头颈部定性DWI (QlDWI)、定量DWI (QnDWI)和动态对比增强PWI (DCE-PWI)的获取、临床适应症、分析和报告。使用SPSS®v27进行描述性统计和组间比较。结果:256所院校(ESHNR院校182所,ASHNR院校74所)共获得294份独立问卷,回复率为17.6%。95.7%的受访机构常规获取一些头颈部适应症的DWI,其中92.5%的放射科医生解释QlDWI,但只有36.7%的放射科医生分析QnDWI。QlDWI最常用于原发性粘膜肿块或中耳,而QnDWI通常用于区分肿瘤组织学,原发性或复发性癌。53.6%的机构常规获得DCE-PWI, 40.8%的受访者使用DCE-PWI,然而,大多数用户没有常规使用DCE-PWI的临床场景。DCE-PWI分析方法多种多样,时间-强度曲线分类是最常报道的。缺乏标准化被认为是不实施QnDWI的一个关键原因,而许多因素阻碍了DCE-PWI的采用。结论:头颈部放射科医师对QlDWI的常规解读普遍存在,但在头颈部QnDWI和DCE-PWI的应用和分析上存在较大差异。扩散(DWI)和动态对比增强灌注成像(DCE-PWI)是如何被头颈部放射科医生在广泛的实践中使用的?一项国际调查表明,对定性DWI的常规解释广泛存在,但定量DWI和DCE-PWI的应用和分析存在许多实施障碍。调查结果将有助于讨论如何在日常实践中标准化和最佳地传播这些MRI技术。可能需要更集中的教育和资源分配,以加速采用定量的DWI和DCE-PWI。
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
European Radiology
European Radiology 医学-核医学
CiteScore
11.60
自引率
8.50%
发文量
874
审稿时长
2-4 weeks
期刊介绍: European Radiology (ER) continuously updates scientific knowledge in radiology by publication of strong original articles and state-of-the-art reviews written by leading radiologists. A well balanced combination of review articles, original papers, short communications from European radiological congresses and information on society matters makes ER an indispensable source for current information in this field. This is the Journal of the European Society of Radiology, and the official journal of a number of societies. From 2004-2008 supplements to European Radiology were published under its companion, European Radiology Supplements, ISSN 1613-3749.
期刊最新文献
Between automation and alienation: rethinking AI's role in radiologist well-being. Reply to the Letter to the Editor: Potential role of breast MRI to identify patients with high-risk lesions who might avoid surgery-a systematic review and meta-analysis. Letter to the Editor: Potential role of breast MRI to identify patients with high-risk lesions who might avoid surgery-a systematic review and meta-analysis. Artificial-intelligence models vs. radiologists in the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer on mpMRI: a meta-analysis. Tumor deposits on MRI in rectal cancer-detection and differentiation from lymph nodes with histopathological correlation.
×
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:604180095
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