View in EDS

Diagnostic Efficacy and Correlation of Intravoxel Incoherent Motion (IVIM) and Contrast‐Enhanced (CE) MRI Perfusion Parameters in Oncology Imaging: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis.

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Diagnostic Efficacy and Correlation of Intravoxel Incoherent Motion (IVIM) and Contrast‐Enhanced (CE) MRI Perfusion Parameters in Oncology Imaging: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis.
Authors: S., Abhijith, Kadavigere, Rajagopal, P. S., Priya, Singh, Dharmesh, Priyanka, Pires, Tancia, Kumar, Dileep, Pendem, Saikiran, Bayford, Richard H.
Source: International Journal of Biomedical Imaging; 11/18/2025, Vol. 2025, p1-23, 23p
Subject Terms: TUMOR diagnosis, MEDICAL information storage & retrieval systems, META-analysis, DESCRIPTIVE statistics, PERFUSION magnetic resonance imaging, SYSTEMATIC reviews, MEDLINE, MEDICAL databases, ONLINE information services, DATA analysis software, CONFIDENCE intervals, SENSITIVITY & specificity (Statistics), EVALUATION
Abstract: Background: Intravoxel incoherent motion (IVIM) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is a noncontrast technique estimating diffusion and perfusion parameters via multiple b‐values, essential for oncology imaging. However, there is limited collective evidence regarding the efficacy of IVIM in oncology imaging compared to contrast‐enhanced (CE) MRI perfusion techniques. This systematic review and meta‐analysis compared IVIM′s diagnostic accuracy and correlation with CE MRI perfusion techniques. Methods: Following PRISMA guidelines (PROSPERO‐registered), a literature search across five databases (PubMed, Scopus, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library) was conducted. Diagnostic metrics, including AUC, sensitivity, specificity, and correlation coefficients, were analyzed using a random‐effects model, with heterogeneity and publication bias assessed via I2 statistics and Egger′s test. Results: Eighteen studies on breast, rectal, and brain cancers were analyzed. For breast cancer, IVIM showed 83.50% sensitivity and 81.24% specificity compared to dynamic contrast‐enhanced (DCE) MRI′s 88.04% sensitivity and 65.98% specificity. In rectal cancer, IVIM achieved 70.9% sensitivity and 56.2% specificity, outperforming DCE MRI′s 58.11% sensitivity and 72.49% specificity. For gliomas, IVIM demonstrated 92.27% sensitivity and 74.06% specificity compared to dynamic susceptibility contrast (DSC) MRI′s 95.71% sensitivity and 92.91% specificity. Correlations between IVIM and CE parameters were weak to moderate. Conclusion: IVIM demonstrated equal or superior diagnostic performance to CE MRI in breast cancer, rectal cancer, and gliomas, offering a noncontrast alternative. However, unclear parameter correlations warrant future studies focusing on IVIM protocol optimization based on perfusion regimes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Copyright of International Journal of Biomedical Imaging is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Database: Complementary Index
Description
Abstract:Background: Intravoxel incoherent motion (IVIM) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is a noncontrast technique estimating diffusion and perfusion parameters via multiple b‐values, essential for oncology imaging. However, there is limited collective evidence regarding the efficacy of IVIM in oncology imaging compared to contrast‐enhanced (CE) MRI perfusion techniques. This systematic review and meta‐analysis compared IVIM′s diagnostic accuracy and correlation with CE MRI perfusion techniques. Methods: Following PRISMA guidelines (PROSPERO‐registered), a literature search across five databases (PubMed, Scopus, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library) was conducted. Diagnostic metrics, including AUC, sensitivity, specificity, and correlation coefficients, were analyzed using a random‐effects model, with heterogeneity and publication bias assessed via I2 statistics and Egger′s test. Results: Eighteen studies on breast, rectal, and brain cancers were analyzed. For breast cancer, IVIM showed 83.50% sensitivity and 81.24% specificity compared to dynamic contrast‐enhanced (DCE) MRI′s 88.04% sensitivity and 65.98% specificity. In rectal cancer, IVIM achieved 70.9% sensitivity and 56.2% specificity, outperforming DCE MRI′s 58.11% sensitivity and 72.49% specificity. For gliomas, IVIM demonstrated 92.27% sensitivity and 74.06% specificity compared to dynamic susceptibility contrast (DSC) MRI′s 95.71% sensitivity and 92.91% specificity. Correlations between IVIM and CE parameters were weak to moderate. Conclusion: IVIM demonstrated equal or superior diagnostic performance to CE MRI in breast cancer, rectal cancer, and gliomas, offering a noncontrast alternative. However, unclear parameter correlations warrant future studies focusing on IVIM protocol optimization based on perfusion regimes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
ISSN:16874188
DOI:10.1155/ijbi/3621023