%0 Journal Article
%T The ability of ADC measurements in the assessment of patients with stage I endometrial carcinoma based on three risk categories
%A Feng Yuan
%A Fenghua Ma
%A Guofu Zhang
%A Jia Liu
%A Shijia Wang
%A Xiaojun Chen
%A Xiaomei Tian
%J Acta Radiologica
%@ 1600-0455
%D 2019
%R 10.1177/0284185118768105
%X Better selection of patients with intermediate and high-risk stage I endometrial carcinoma (EC) for lymphadenectomy has an important effect on the prognosis. To investigate the role of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) measurements in the assessment of stage I EC patients based on three risk categories. We retrospectively studied 80 patients with EC and 28 cervical cancer patients with normal endometrium. 1.5-T conventional magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) (b£¿=£¿0, 1000£¿s/mm2) were performed, and ADC values were calculated. Sixty-eight stage I EC patients were divided into three groups: low-risk EC (group 1); intermediate-risk EC (group 2); and high-risk EC (group 3). The remaining 12 EC patients were in stages II and III. Intraclass coefficient, Mann¨CWhitney U test, Kruskal¨CWallis test, and receiver operating characteristics were used for statistical analysis. The mean ADC values (£¿¡Á£¿10¨C3 mm2 /s) were 0.851£¿¡À£¿0.131, 0.734£¿¡À£¿0.108, and 0.710£¿¡À£¿0.108 for groups 1, 2 and 3, respectively. Significant statistical differences were achieved for the three groups (P£¿=£¿0.0005). The mean ADC values of group 1 were significantly lower than those in group 2£¿+£¿3 (0.725£¿¡À£¿0.106; P£¿=£¿0.0001). For the prediction of groups 2£¿+£¿3, the area under the curve of 0.786 and the cut-off value of£¿¡Ü£¿0.742 were identified, with a sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of 66.67%, 84.09%, and 73.53%, respectively. ADC measurements may have the potential to select intermediate-risk and high-risk stage I EC patients for lymphadenectomy
%K Endometrial carcinoma
%K magnetic resonance imaging
%K diffusion-weighted imaging
%K apparent diffusion coefficient
%K lymphadenectomy
%K risk categorization
%U https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0284185118768105