Advertisement

Use of DWI in Female Pelvis

  • German A. Castrillon
  • Stephan Anderson
  • Nagaraj Holalkere
  • Jorge A. SotoEmail author
Chapter

Abstract

Multiple applications of DWI in the female pelvis have been described, and some have demonstrated to be of considerable practical utility. Studies have found that the mean ADC values can be used to differentiate between normal and cancerous tissue in the uterine cervix, with little overlap. Squamous cell carcinoma tends to have lower ADC values than adenocarcinoma and normal tissue has higher ADC values than both primary malignancies. Cervical tumors with higher cellular density and higher histologic grade show a tendency towards lower ADC values compared with those of tumors with lower histologic grade and lower cellular density, which have higher ADC values. The ADC values in uterine cervical cancer increases after chemotherapy and/or radiation therapy and, therefore, following the ADC values through the course of treatment may add to the value of MRI for monitoring response to therapy. Besides, DWI has recently demonstrated its capacity to distinguish between metastatic and hyperplastic lymph nodes using ADC quantifications, with significant lower ADC values for metastatic lymph nodes. Data are accumulating to support the use of DWI as a tool to detect endometrial carcinoma and to differentiate benign from malignant lesions. For example, ADC values of endometrial carcinoma are lower than the ADC values of endometrial polyps, submucosal leiomyomas, and normal endometrial tissue. Hyperintensity of endometrial tumors on DWI improves the visualization of depth of tumor invasion. Besides, ADC values are useful for differentiation of degenerated leiomyomas and normal myometrium from the rare malignant uterine sarcomas. DWI has also showed its potential as an adjunt for assessing treatment of uterine fibroids. The ADC values of malignant ovarian tumors vary widely, a phenomenon that is attributable to their heterogeneous histology and morphology, limiting its utilization in the characterization of ovarian masses. DWI has demonstrated high sensitivity in the detection of small metastatic peritoneal deposits of ovarian cancer due to high CNR, even in challenging anatomical areas.

Keywords

Endometrial Cancer Endometrial Carcinoma Myometrial Invasion Junctional Zone Adnexal Mass 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Further Reading

  1. Balleyguier C, Sala E, Da Cunha T et al (2011) Staging of uterine cervical cancer with MRI: guidelines of the European Society of Urogenital Radiology. Eur Radiol 21(5):1102–1110; Epub Nov 10, 2010PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Boronow RC, Morrow CP, Creasman WT et al (1984) Surgical staging in endometrial cancer: clinical-pathologic findings of a prospective study. Obstet Gynecol 63(6):825–832PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Charles-Edwards EM, Messiou C, Morgan VA et al (2008) Diffusion-weighted imaging in cervical cancer with an endovaginal technique: potential value for improving tumor detection in stage Ia and Ib1 disease. Radiology 249(2):541–550PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chen J, Zhang Y, Liang B et al (2010) The utility of diffusion-weighted MR imaging in cervical cancer. Eur J Radiol 74(3):101–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chen YB, Hu CM, Chen GL et al (2010) Staging of uterine cervical carcinoma: whole-body diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging. Abdom Imaging; Aug 21, 2010 [Epub ahead of print]Google Scholar
  6. Fujii S, Kakite S, Nishihara K et al (2008) Diagnostic accuracy of diffusion-weighted imaging in differentiating benign from malignant ovarian lesions. J Magn Reson Imaging 28(5):1149–1156PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Fujii S, Matsusue E, Kigawa J et al (2008) Diagnostic accuracy of the apparent diffusion coefficient in differentiating benign from malignant uterine endometrial cavity lesions: initial results. Eur Radiol 18(2):384–389PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Harry VN, Semple SI, Gilbert FJ et al (2008) Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging in the early detection of response to chemoradiation in cervical cancer. Gynecol Oncol 111(2):213–220PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hiwatashi A, Kinoshita T, Moritani T et al (2003) Hypointensity on diffusion-weighted MRI of the brain related to T2 short- ening and susceptibility effects. Am J Roentgenol 181:1705–1709CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Inada Y, Matsuki M, Nakai G et al (2009) Body diffusion-weighted MR imaging of uterine endometrial cancer: is it helpful in the detection of cancer in nonenhanced MR imaging? Eur J Radiol 70(1):122–127PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Jacobs MA, Gultekin DH, Kim HS (2010) Comparison between diffusion-weighted imaging, T2-weighted, and postcontrast T1-weighted imaging after MR-guided, high intensity, focused ultrasound treatment of uterine leiomyomata: preliminary results. Med Phys 37(9):4768–4776PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Jacobs MA, Ibrahim TS, Ouwerkerk R (2007) AAPM/RSNA physics tutorials for residents: MR imaging: brief overview and emerging applications. Radiographics 27:1213–1229PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Katayama M, Masui T, Kobayashi S et al (2002) Diffusion-weighted echo planar imaging of ovarian tumors: is it useful to measure apparent diffusion coefficients? J Comput Assist Tomogr 26:250–256PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kilickesmez O, Bayramoglu S, Inci E et al (2009) Quantitative diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging of normal and diseased uterine zones. Acta Radiol 50(3):340–347PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kinkel K (2006) Pitfalls in staging uterine neoplasm with imaging: a review. Abdom Imaging 31:164–173PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kyriazi S, Collins DJ, Morgan VA et al (2010) Diffusion-weighted imaging of peritoneal disease for noninvasive staging of advanced ovarian cancer. Radiographics 30(5):1269–1285PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Le Bihan D (1990) Diffusion/perfusion MR imaging of the brain: from structure to function. Radiology 177:328–329PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Liapi E, Kamel IR, Bluemke DA et al (2005) Assessment of response of uterine fibroids and myometrium to emboli­zation using diffusion-weighted echoplanar MR imaging. J Comput Assist Tomogr 29(1):83–86PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lin G, Ho KC, Wang JJ et al (2008) Detection of lymph node metastasis in cervical and uterine cancers by diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging at 3 T. J Magn Reson Imaging 28(1):128–135PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lin G, Ng KK, Chang CJ, Wang JJ et al (2009) Myometrial invasion in endometrial cancer: diagnostic accuracy of diffusion-weighted 3.0-T MR imaging – initial experience. Radiology 250(3):784–792PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Liu Y, Bai R, Sun H et al (2009) Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging of uterine cervical cancer. J Comput Assist Tomogr 33(6):858–862PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Liu Y, Bai R, Sun H et al (2009) Diffusion-weighted imaging in predicting and monitoring the response of uterine cervical cancer to combined chemoradiation. Clin Radiol 64(11):1067–1074PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Maldjian JA, Listerud J, Moonis G et al (2001) Computing ­diffusion rates in T2-dark hematomas and areas of low T2 signal. Am J Neuroradiol 22:112–118PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Manfredi R, Gui B, Maresca G et al (2005) Endometrial cancer: magnetic resonance imaging. Abdom Imaging 30:626–636PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. McCarthy S, Scott G, Majumdar S et al (1989) Uterine junctional zone: MR study of water content and relaxation ­properties. Radiology 171:241–243PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. McVeigh PZ, Syed AM, Milosevic M et al (2008) Diffusion-weighted MRI in cervical cancer. Eur Radiol 18:1058–1064PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Moteki T, Ishizaka H (2000) Diffusion-weighted EPI of cystic ovarian lesions: evaluation of cystic contents using ­apparent diffusion coefficients. J Magn Reson Imaging 12:1014–1019PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Naganawa S, Sato C, Kumada H et al (2005) Apparent diffusion coefficient in cervical cancer of the uterus: comparison with the normal uterine cervix. Eur Radiol 15:71–78PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Nakayama T, Yoshimitsu K, Irie H et al (2005) Diffusion weighted echo-planar MR imaging and ADC mapping in the differential diagnosis of ovarian cystic masses: usefulness of detecting keratinoid substances in mature cystic teratomas. J Magn Reson Imaging 22:271–278PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Namimoto T, Yamashita Y, Awai K et al (2009) Combined use of T2-weighted and diffusion-weighted 3-T MR imaging for differentiating uterine sarcomas from benign leiomyomas. Eur Radiol 19(11):2756–2764PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Payne GS, Schmidt M, Morgan VA et al (2010) Evaluation of magnetic resonance diffusion and spectroscopy measurements as predictive biomarkers in stage 1 cervical cancer. Gynecol Oncol 116(2):246–252PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Prat J (2004) Prognostic parameters of endometrial carcinoma. Hum Pathol 35:649–662PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Sahdev A, Sohaib SA, Wenaden AE et al (2007) The performance of magnetic resonance imaging in early cervical ­carcinoma: a long-term experience. Int J Gynecol Cancer 17:629–636PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Sala E, Priest AN, Kataoka M et al (2010) Apparent diffusion coefficient and vascular signal fraction measurements with magnetic resonance imaging: feasibility in metastatic ovarian cancer at 3 Tesla – technical development. Eur Radiol 20(2):491–496PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Shen SH, Chiou YY, Wang JH et al (2008) Diffusion-weighted single-shot echo-planar imaging with parallel technique in assessment of endometrial cancer. Am J Roentgenol 190:481–488CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Shimada K, Ohashi I, Kasahara I et al (2004) Differentiation between completely hyalinized uterine leiomyomas and ordinary leiomyomas: three-phase dynamic magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) vs. diffusion-weighted MRI with very small b-factors. J Magn Reson Imaging 20:97–104PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Takeuchi M, Matsuzaki K, Nishitani H (2009) Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging of endometrial ­cancer: differentiation from benign endometrial lesions and preoperative assessment of myometrial invasion. Acta Radiol 50(8):947–953PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Takeuchi M, Matsuzaki K, Nishitani H (2009) Hyperintense uterine myometrial masses on T2-weighted magnetic resonance imaging: differentiation with diffusion-weighted mag­netic resonance imaging. J Comput Assist Tomogr 33(6):834–837PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Takeuchi M, Matsuzaki K, Nishitani H (2010) Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging of ovarian tumors: differentiation of benign and malignant solid components of ovarian masses. J Comput Assist Tomogr 34(2):173–176PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Tamai K, Koyama T, Saga T et al (2007) Diffusion-weighted MR imaging of uterine endometrial cancer. J Magn Reson Imaging 26(3):682–687PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Tamai K, Koyama T, Saga T, Morisawa N, Fujimoto K, Mikami Y et al (2008) The utility of diffusion-weighted MR imaging for differentiating uterine sarcomas from benign leiomyomas. Eur Radiol 18:723–730PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Wang J, Yu T, Bai R et al (2010) The value of the apparent diffusion coefficient in differentiating stage IA endometrial carcinoma from normal endometrium and benign diseases of the endometrium: initial study at 3-T magnetic resonance scanner. J Comput Assist Tomogr 34(3):332–337PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Whittaker CS, Coady A, Culver L et al (2009) Diffusion-weighted MR imaging of female pelvic tumors: a pictorial review. Radiographics 29(3):759–774PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Xue HD, Li S, Sun F et al (2008) Clinical application of body diffusion weighted MR imaging in the diagnosis and preoperative N staging of cervical cancer. Chin Med Sci J 23(3):133–137PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Yamashita Y, Harada M, Sawada T et al (1993) Normal uterus and FIGO stage I endometrial carcinoma: dynamic gadolinium-enhanced MR imaging. Radiology 186:495–501PubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. Yu SP, He L, Liu B et al (2010) Differential diagnosis of metastasis from non-metastatic lymph nodes in cervical cancers: pilot study of diffusion weighted imaging with background suppression at 3 T magnetic resonance. Chin Med J Engl 123(20):2820–2824PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • German A. Castrillon
    • 1
  • Stephan Anderson
    • 2
  • Nagaraj Holalkere
    • 2
  • Jorge A. Soto
    • 2
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of RadiologyUniversity of AntioquiaMedellinColombia
  2. 2.Radiology DepartmentBoston University School of MedicineBostonUSA

Personalised recommendations