Journal Article
. 2020 Mar; 20(1):60-68.
doi: 10.2463/

Turbo Spin-echo Diffusion-weighted Imaging Compared with Single-shot Echo-planar Diffusion-weighted Imaging: Image Quality and Diagnostic Performance When Differentiating between Ductal Carcinoma in situ and Invasive Ductal Carcinoma

Naoko Mori 1 Shunji Mugikura 1 Minoru Miyashita 2 Yu Mori 3 Yui Maekawa 1 Tatsuo Nagasaka 4 Kei Takase 1 
  • PMID: 32147641
  •     33 References


Purpose: To compare the image quality between turbo spin-echo (TSE)-diffusion weighted imaging (DWI) and single-shot echo-planar imaging (EPI)-DWI, and to verify the diagnostic performance of the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) parameters of the two techniques by using histogram analysis in terms of differentiation between ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) and invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC) lesions.

Methods: Ninety-four women with 94 lesions diagnosed as breast cancer by surgery underwent IRB-approved preoperative magnetic resonance imaging, including TSE and EPI-DWI with b-values of 50 and 850 s/mm2. Twenty lesions were identified as DCIS and 74 as IDC. Image quality [signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), and geometric distortion] was evaluated quantitatively and compared between the TSE and EPI-DWI. A histogram analysis of the entire tumor voxel-based ADC data was performed, and the 10th, 25th, 50th, 75th, and 90th percentile values of each technique were compared between DCIS and IDC lesions.

Results: The SNR and CNR of TSE-DWI were significantly higher than those of EPI-DWI (P < 0.0001 and < 0.0001). The geometric distortion of TSE-DWI was significantly lower than that of EPI-DWI (P < 0.0001). In TSE-DWI, the 10th, 25th, 50th, and 75th percentile values were significantly different between the DCIS and IDC lesions (P = 0.0010, 0.0004, 0.0008, and 0.0044, respectively). In EPI-DWI, the 50th and 75th percentile values were significantly different between the two groups (P = 0.0009 and 0.0093). There was no significant difference in the area under the curve of the receiver operating characteristic analysis of the 10th, 25th, 50th, and 75th percentile values of TSE-DWI, and the 50th and 75th percentile values of EPI-DWI (P = 0.29).

Conclusion: The image quality of TSE-DWI was better than that of EPI-DWI. DCIS lesions were distinguished from IDC lesions with a wider range of percentile values in TSE-DWI than in EPI-DWI, although diagnostic performance was not significantly different between the techniques.

Keywords: Turbo spin-echo; breast cancer; diffusion weighted imaging; ductal carcinoma in situ; invasive ductal carcinoma.

Combined contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance and diffusion-weighted imaging reading adapted to the "Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System" for multiparametric 3-T imaging of breast lesions.
K Pinker, H Bickel, +8 authors, W Bogner.
Eur Radiol, 2013 Mar 19; 23(7). PMID: 23504036
Diffusion-weighted half-Fourier single-shot turbo spin echo imaging in breast tumors: differentiation of invasive ductal carcinoma from fibroadenoma.
Takahiro Kinoshita, Naobumi Yashiro, +3 authors, Makoto Narita.
J Comput Assist Tomogr, 2002 Dec 19; 26(6). PMID: 12488758
Predictors of invasion in patients with core-needle biopsy-diagnosed ductal carcinoma in situ and recommendations for a selective approach to sentinel lymph node biopsy in ductal carcinoma in situ.
Lei Huo, Nour Sneige, +3 authors, Erika Resetkova.
Cancer, 2006 Sep 16; 107(8). PMID: 16977650
Single-shot, turbo spin-echo, diffusion-weighted imaging versus spin-echo-planar, diffusion-weighted imaging in the detection of acquired middle ear cholesteatoma.
B De Foer, J-P Vercruysse, +6 authors, E Offeciers.
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol, 2006 Aug 16; 27(7). PMID: 16908562    Free PMC article.
Detection of invasive components in cases of breast ductal carcinoma in situ on biopsy by using apparent diffusion coefficient MR parameters.
Naoko Mori, Hideki Ota, +6 authors, Shoki Takahashi.
Eur Radiol, 2013 Jun 05; 23(10). PMID: 23732688
Diffusion-weighted imaging of breast cancer with the sensitivity encoding technique: analysis of the apparent diffusion coefficient value.
Yoshifumi Kuroki, Katsuhiro Nasu, +4 authors, Shigeru Nawano.
Magn Reson Med Sci, 2005 Aug 12; 3(2). PMID: 16093623
Diffusion-weighted MRI in pretreatment prediction of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with breast cancer.
Raphael Richard, Isabelle Thomassin, +7 authors, Cedric de Bazelaire.
Eur Radiol, 2013 May 09; 23(9). PMID: 23652844
Diffusion-weighted imaging improves the diagnostic accuracy of conventional 3.0-T breast MR imaging.
Riham H Ei Khouli, Michael A Jacobs, +4 authors, David A Bluemke.
Radiology, 2010 Jun 25; 256(1). PMID: 20574085    Free PMC article.
Highly Cited.
Comparison of breast cancer detection by diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging and mammography.
Miho I Yoshikawa, Shozo Ohsumi, +4 authors, Teruhito Mochizuki.
Radiat Med, 2007 Jun 22; 25(5). PMID: 17581710
Usefulness of diffusion-weighted MRI with echo-planar technique in the evaluation of cellularity in gliomas.
T Sugahara, Y Korogi, +9 authors, M Takahashi.
J Magn Reson Imaging, 1999 Feb 25; 9(1). PMID: 10030650
Highly Cited.
Is there a role of sentinel lymph node biopsy in ductal carcinoma in situ?: analysis of 587 cases.
Amit Goyal, Anthony Douglas-Jones, +3 authors, Robert E Mansel.
Breast Cancer Res Treat, 2006 Mar 23; 98(3). PMID: 16552627
Diffusion-weighted and dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI in evaluation of early treatment effects during neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer patients.
Line R Jensen, Benjamin Garzon, +3 authors, Ingrid S Gribbestad.
J Magn Reson Imaging, 2011 Oct 18; 34(5). PMID: 22002757
The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data.
J R Landis, G G Koch.
Biometrics, 1977 Mar 01; 33(1). PMID: 843571
Highly Cited.
Pure ductal carcinoma in situ: a range of MRI features.
Sughra Raza, Monica Vallejo, Sona A Chikarmane, Robyn L Birdwell.
AJR Am J Roentgenol, 2008 Aug 22; 191(3). PMID: 18716095
Diffusion-weighted MR imaging: pretreatment prediction of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with breast cancer.
Sang Hee Park, Woo Kyung Moon, +5 authors, Dong-Young Noh.
Radiology, 2010 Sep 21; 257(1). PMID: 20851939
The impact of sentinel lymph node biopsy in patients with a core biopsy diagnosis of ductal carcinoma in situ.
Wai Ka Hung, Marcus Ying, +2 authors, Lap Kin Chan.
Breast Cancer, 2009 Sep 17; 17(4). PMID: 19756924
Apparent diffusion coefficient as an MR imaging biomarker of low-risk ductal carcinoma in situ: a pilot study.
Mami Iima, Denis Le Bihan, +7 authors, Kaori Togashi.
Radiology, 2011 Jun 03; 260(2). PMID: 21633054
Comparison of intravoxel incoherent motion diffusion-weighted imaging between turbo spin-echo and echo-planar imaging of the head and neck.
Ryoji Mikayama, Hidetake Yabuuchi, +7 authors, Hiroshi Honda.
Eur Radiol, 2017 Aug 06; 28(1). PMID: 28779394
Image quality assessment of single-shot turbo spin echo diffusion-weighted imaging with parallel imaging technique: a phantom study.
Tsukasa Yoshida, Atsushi Urikura, +3 authors, Yoichiro Hosokawa.
Br J Radiol, 2016 Jul 28; 89(1065). PMID: 27452269    Free PMC article.
Apparent diffusion coefficient as a potential surrogate marker for Ki-67 index in mucinous breast carcinoma.
Natsuko Onishi, Shotaro Kanao, +7 authors, Kaori Togashi.
J Magn Reson Imaging, 2014 Mar 05; 41(3). PMID: 24590513
Risk stratification of ductal carcinoma in situ using whole-lesion histogram analysis of the apparent diffusion coefficient.
Jin You Kim, Jin Joo Kim, +6 authors, Robert Grimm.
Eur Radiol, 2018 Aug 04; 29(2). PMID: 30073498
Correlation of the apparent diffusion coefficiency values on diffusion-weighted imaging with prognostic factors for breast cancer.
S Y Choi, Y-W Chang, +3 authors, D Y Seo.
Br J Radiol, 2011 Dec 01; 85(1016). PMID: 22128125    Free PMC article.
Diffusion-weighted MR for differentiation of breast lesions at 3.0 T: how does selection of diffusion protocols affect diagnosis?
Wolfgang Bogner, Stephan Gruber, +6 authors, Siegfried Trattnig.
Radiology, 2009 Aug 26; 253(2). PMID: 19703869
Noise measurement and estimation in MR imaging experiments.
Johannes T Heverhagen.
Radiology, 2007 Nov 21; 245(3). PMID: 18024445
Diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) in MR mammography (MRM): clinical comparison of echo planar imaging (EPI) and half-Fourier single-shot turbo spin echo (HASTE) diffusion techniques.
P A T Baltzer, D M Renz, +6 authors, W A Kaiser.
Eur Radiol, 2009 Mar 17; 19(7). PMID: 19288109
Measuring signal-to-noise ratios in MR imaging.
L Kaufman, D M Kramer, L E Crooks, D A Ortendahl.
Radiology, 1989 Oct 01; 173(1). PMID: 2781018
Automated region detection based on the contrast-to-noise ratio in near-infrared tomography.
Xiaomei Song, Brian W Pogue, +4 authors, Keith D Paulsen.
Appl Opt, 2004 Mar 11; 43(5). PMID: 15008484
Diffusion-weighted imaging of mucinous carcinoma of the breast: evaluation of apparent diffusion coefficient and signal intensity in correlation with histologic findings.
Reiko Woodhams, Satoko Kakita, +4 authors, Hiroto Hatabu.
AJR Am J Roentgenol, 2009 Jun 23; 193(1). PMID: 19542422
Diffusion-weighted breast MRI: Clinical applications and emerging techniques.
Savannah C Partridge, Noam Nissan, +2 authors, Eric E Sigmund.
J Magn Reson Imaging, 2016 Oct 01; 45(2). PMID: 27690173    Free PMC article.
Highly Cited. Review.
Readout-segmented echo-planar imaging improves the diagnostic performance of diffusion-weighted MR breast examinations at 3.0 T.
Wolfgang Bogner, Katja Pinker-Domenig, +5 authors, Stephan Gruber.
Radiology, 2012 Mar 23; 263(1). PMID: 22438442
[Method of SNR determination using clinical images].
Akio Ogura, Tosiaki Miyati, +5 authors, Yoshio Machida.
Nihon Hoshasen Gijutsu Gakkai Zasshi, 2007 Oct 06; 63(9). PMID: 17917363
Peritumoral apparent diffusion coefficients for prediction of lymphovascular invasion in clinically node-negative invasive breast cancer.
Naoko Mori, Shunji Mugikura, +8 authors, Shoki Takahashi.
Eur Radiol, 2015 May 31; 26(2). PMID: 26024846
Diffusion-weighted MR imaging in head and neck cancer: comparison between half-fourier acquired single-shot turbo spin-echo and EPI techniques.
M H Verhappen, P J W Pouwels, +4 authors, J A Castelijns.
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol, 2012 Feb 11; 33(7). PMID: 22322615    Free PMC article.