| Objective Evaluation of3.0T MR Diffusion weighted imaging (Diffusion‐weighted imaging, DWI) in colorectal cancer preoperative neoadjuvant therapy effect of assessment value.Method Will be in January2011to February2013in our hospital during pelvic MRI scan showed clear lesions and pathological results contrast and for colorectal cancer preoperative neoadjuvant therapy of40patients as the research object. Measurement before and after treatment the largest mass level of thickness and mass before and after treatment the average ADC values, computational thickness reduce ratio (before and after treatment thickness difference/before treatment thickness), ADC difference (after treatment ADC values‐before treatment ADC values), ADC growth ratio (ADC difference before treatment/ADC values). With two kinds of pathological stage (before and after treatment pathologic whether drop period and RCRG installment) as the standard, comparison before and after treatment and the change of the thickness of ADC value degree and the relationship between the two stages.Result Before and after treatment of tumor thickness (u=6.229, P <0.001) and ADC values (t=12.029, P <0.001), all of which differences statistically. To reduce the thickness of the mean ratio was0.3468±0.2454, ADC differential mean for（0.5842±0.3033）x10‐3best callus induction/s, ADC growth ratio mean0.6620±0.3966, above all have statistical significance. To RCRG stage as the standard, the patients were divided into group1),2) group and3period group, three groups before treatment between thickness (P=0.378) and reduce the thickness ratio (F=0.490, P=0.615) difference was not statistically significant; Three groups of the difference between the ADC (F=3.975, P=0.028) and ADC growth ratio (F=5.434, P=0.009) are statistically significant differences between the three groups do between comparison between two1) group and3period group of ADC difference and ADC growth ratio difference has statistical significance (P <0.05), the other two comparison between difference was not statistically significant (P>0.05). The correlation test, before treatment ADC values and time related with statistical significance (P=0.07); To T stage is reduced to the standard, the patients were divided into drop period group and not will stage group, two groups before treatment of ADC value (u=1.474, P=0.141) difference was not statistically significant; The thickness of the two groups to reduce ratio (t=0.028, P‐0.978) difference was not statistically significant; The two groups before and after treatment of ADC difference (u=2.233, P=0.026) and ADC growth rate (u=2.5, P=0.012) are statistically significant differences. The participants working curve method and Kappa inspection method, in order to analyse the ADC difference value higher than0.4255x10‐3best callus induction/s and（or） ADC value growth rate is higher than0.4470for threshold value, the diagnosis of T‐drop period group of sensitivity is0.867, respectively) for0.778, correct index is0.645the Kappa are0.60, P <0.001. To the ADC difference greater than0.5532x10‐3best callus induction/s for threshold value diagnosis to achieve maximum drop period group of sensitivity is0.889, respectively) for0.533, accuracy right index is0.422, Kappa=0.295, diagnosis consistency difference; But by ADC growth ratio greater than0.6292diagnosis to achieve maximum drop period for the sensitivity of0.889, respectively) for0.633, correct index is0.522, Kappa=0.502, diagnosis of medium consistency.Conclusion DWI technique and ADC values quantitative measurement method can evaluate colorectal cancer neoadjuvant therapy effect, when b=800s/best callus induction, ADC difference value higher than0.4255x10‐3best callus induction/s and（or） ADC value growth rate is higher than0.4470for diagnosis of tumor drop period threshold value. Tumor maximum thickness measurement to assess neoadjuvant therapy efficacy. |
PDF Full Text Request