Comparative study of stretched-exponential and kurtosis models of diffusion-weighted imaging in renal assessment to distinguish patients with primary aldosteronism from healthy controls

Résumé fourni par la source

PURPOSE: To compare the ability of diffusion parameters obtained by stretched-exponential and kurtosis models of diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) to distinguish between patients with primary aldosteronism (PA) and healthy controls (HCs) in renal assessment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 44 participants (22 patients and 22 HCs) underwent renal MRI with an 11 b-value DWI sequence and a 3 b-value diffusion kurtosis imaging (DKI) sequence from June 2021 to April 2022. Binary logistic regression was used to construct regression models combining different diffusion parameters. Receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis and comparisons were used to evaluate the ability of single diffusion parameters and combined diffusion models to distinguish between the two groups. RESULTS: A total of six diffusion parameters (including the cortical anomalous exponent term [α_Cortex], medullary fractional anisotropy [FA_Medulla], cortical FA [FA_Cortex], cortical axial diffusivity [Da_Cortex], medullary mean diffusivity [MD_Medulla] and medullary radial diffusivity [Dr_Medulla]) were included, and 10 regression models were studied. The area under the curve (AUC) of Dr_Medulla was 0.855, comparable to that of FA_Cortex and FA_Medulla and significantly higher than that of α_Cortex, Da_Cortex and MD_Medulla. The AUC of the Model_all parameters was 0.967, comparable to that of Model_FA (0.946) and Model_DKI (0.966) and significantly higher than that of the other models. The sensitivity and specificity of Model_all parameters were 87.2% and 95%, respectively. CONCLUSION: The Model_all parameters, Model_FA and Model_DKI were valid for differentiating between PA patients and HCs with similar differentiation efficacy and were superior to single diffusion parameters and other models.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.