Copyright
©The Author(s) 2018.
World J Gastroenterol. Feb 28, 2018; 24(8): 929-940
Published online Feb 28, 2018. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v24.i8.929
Published online Feb 28, 2018. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v24.i8.929
Table 2 Diagnostic value of intravoxel incoherent motion diffusion-weighted imaging and conventional diffusion-weighted imaging parameters in differentiating the low-grade group (G1) from the high-grade groups (G2 and G3)
Parameter | Observer | AUC (95%CI) | Optimal cutoff value | Youden index | Sensitivity (%) | Specificity (%) | Accuracy (%) |
ADC | R1 | 0.843 (0.718, 0.968) | 1.285 | 0.619 | 78.6(11/14) | 83.3(40/48) | 82.3(51/62) |
R2 | 0.852 (0.730, 0.974) | 1.275 | 0.649 | 85.7(12/14) | 79.2(38/48) | 80.6(50/62) | |
D | R1 | 0.909 (0.834, 0.985) | 0.962 | 0.741 | 92.9(13/14) | 81.3(39/48) | 83.9(52/62) |
R2 | 0.911 (0.832, 0.990) | 0.977 | 0.804 | 92.9(13/14) | 87.5(42/48) | 88.7(55/62) | |
D* | R1 | 0.632 (0.489, 0.776) | 17.75 | 0.378 | 85.7(12/14) | 52.1(25/48) | 59.7(37/62) |
R2 | 0.636 (0.495, 0.777) | 17.90 | 0.378 | 85.7(12/14) | 52.1(25/48) | 59.7(37/62) | |
f | R1 | 0.523 (0.348, 0.698) | 0.216 | 0.182 | 78.6(11/14) | 39.6(19/48) | 48.4(30/62) |
R2 | 0.518 (0.332, 0.704) | 0.246 | 0.173 | 71.4(10/14) | 45.8(22/48) | 51.6(32/62) |
- Citation: Zhu SC, Liu YH, Wei Y, Li LL, Dou SW, Sun TY, Shi DP. Intravoxel incoherent motion diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging for predicting histological grade of hepatocellular carcinoma: Comparison with conventional diffusion-weighted imaging. World J Gastroenterol 2018; 24(8): 929-940
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1007-9327/full/v24/i8/929.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v24.i8.929