Isfahan University of Medical Sciences

Science Communicator Platform

Stay connected! Follow us on X network (Twitter):
Share this content! On (X network) By
Determining the Diagnostic Value of Dwibs in the Diagnosis of Breast Lesions Compared to Dynamic Contrast‑Enhanced Mri: A Retrospective Observational Study Publisher



Farghadani M1 ; Mozafari S2 ; Riahinejad M1 ; Haghighi M1 ; Samani RE3 ; Taravati AM4 ; Rostami K5 ; Shahrokh SG4 ; Sadeghian A1
Authors
Show Affiliations
Authors Affiliations
  1. 1. Department of Radiology, School of Medicine, Isfahan University of Medical Science, Hezar Jerib Ave, Isfahan, Iran
  2. 2. Department of Emergency Medicine, School of Medicine, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran
  3. 3. Department of Surgery, School of Medicine, Isfahan University of Medical Science, Hezar Jerib Ave, Isfahan, Iran
  4. 4. Department of Radiology, School of Medicine, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran
  5. 5. Department of Radiology, School of Medicine, Yazd University of Medical Sciences, Yazd, Iran

Source: Advanced Biomedical Research Published:2025


Abstract

Background: Diffusion‑weighted imaging with background body signal suppression (DWIBS) is a new imaging tool for the diagnosis of breast lesions. This study aims to compare DWIBS with contrast‑enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (CE‑MRI) sequences. Materials and Methods: Eighty consecutive patients underwent both CE‑MRI and DWIBS images. DWIBS was assessed qualitatively and quantitatively using the apparent diffusion coefficient mapping. A threshold of 1.44 × 10‑3 mm2/s was considered as a cutoff value between malignant and benign lesions. CE‑MRI images were evaluated based on a combination of kinetic and morphological information and reported using Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System lexicon. Statistical analysis was performed for both sequences based on pathologic findings as a gold standard. Results: Fifty‑five out of 80 lesions (69%) were benign, and 25 malignant lesions (31%) have been reported. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value for CE‑MRI were 100, 38, 42, and 100%, respectively, and those for DWIBS were 77, 70, 53, and 87%, respectively. By comparing DWIBS and CE‑MRI data, no statistically significant difference was reported. Conclusion: DWIBS can be used as an effective alternative for breast CE‑MRI in cases of contradictions of IV contrast injection. © 2025 Advanced Biomedical Research | Published by Wolters Kluwer - Medknow.
Experts (# of related papers)