Abstract:BACKGROUND:Diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) can noninvasively assess renal allograft pathologic changes that provide useful information for clinical management and prognostication. However, it is still unknown whether the bi-exponential model analysis of DWI signals is superior to that of the mono-exponential model.METHODS:Pathologic and DWI data from a total of 47 allografts were prospectively collected and analyzed. Kidney transplant interstitial fibrosis was quantified digitally. The severity of acute and chronic pathologic changes was semi-quantified by calculating the acute composite scores (ACS) and chronic composite score (CCS). Mono-exponential total apparent diffusion coefficient (ADCT), and the bi-exponential parameters of true diffusion (D) and perfusion fraction (fp) were acquired. The diagnostic performances of both mono-exponential and bi-exponential parameters were assessed and compared by calculating the area under the curve (AUC) from receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis.RESULTS:ADCT, D, and fp were all significantly correlated with interstitial fibrosis, ACS, and CCS. Cortical fp discriminated mild from moderate and severe ACS with the largest AUC of 0.89 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.77-0.96]. Noticeably, only cortical fp could differentiate severe ACS from mild-to-moderate ACS (P<0.001) with an AUC of 0.80 (95% CI, 0.65-0.90) and a sensitivity of 100% (95% CI, 66.4-100%). Strikingly, the joint use of D and fp in either the cortex or the medulla could achieve a sensitivity of 100% for identifying either mild or severe interstitial fibrosis. Meanwhile, the serial use of cortical D and cortical fp showed the largest specificity for identifying both mild [88.9% (95% CI, 70.8-97.6%)] and severe [84.4% (95% CI, 67.2-94.7%)] interstitial fibrosis. For identifying mild CCS, the AUC of medullary ADCT (0.90, 95% CI, 0.78-0.97) was similar to that of cortical D (0.81, 95% CI, 0.67-0.91) and fp (0.86, 95% CI, 0.73-0.94), but statistically larger than that of medullary D (P=0.005) and fp (P=0.01). Furthermore, the parallel use of cortical D and cortical fp could increase the sensitivity to 95.0% (95% CI, 75.1-99.9%), whereas serial use of medullary D and medullary fp could increase the specificity to 100% (95% CI, 87.2-100%). The AUCs for differentiating severe from mild and moderate CCS were statistically insignificant among all parameters in the cortex and medulla (P≥0.15).CONCLUSIONS:Cortical fp was superior to the ADCT for identifying both mild and severe acute pathologic changes. Nevertheless, ADCT was equal to or better than single D or fp for evaluating chronic pathologic changes. Thus, both monoexponential and bi-exponential analysis of DWI images are complementary for evaluating kidney allograft pathologic changes, and the combined use of D and fp can increase the sensitivity and specificity for discriminating allograft pathologic changes severity.

Monoexponential, Biexponential, and Stretched Exponential Diffusion-Weighted Imaging Models: Quantitative Biomarkers for Differentiating Renal Clear Cell Carcinoma and Minimal Fat Angiomyolipoma.

Comparison of Monoexponential, Biexponential, Stretched-Exponential, and Kurtosis Models of Diffusion-Weighted Imaging in Differentiation of Renal Solid Masses.

Grading of clear cell renal cell carcinoma by using monoexponential, biexponential, and stretched exponential diffusion-weighted MR imaging

Differentiating between malignant and benign renal tumors: do IVIM and diffusion kurtosis imaging perform better than DWI?

Multiple exponential models of diffusion weighted imaging in differentiating hepatocellular carcinoma from hepatic hemangioma

Application of Monoexponential, Biexponential, and Stretched-Exponential Models of Diffusion-Weighted Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Differential Diagnosis of Metastases and Myeloma in the Spine-Univariate and Multivariate Analysis of Related Parameters.

Quantitative Assessment of Renal Allograft Pathologic Changes: Comparisons of Mono-Exponential and Bi-Exponential Models Using Diffusion-Weighted Imaging.

Comparison of Stretched‐exponential and Monoexponential Model Diffusion‐weighted Imaging in Prostate Cancer and Normal Tissues

Multiparametric diffusion-weighted imaging in breast lesions: Association with pathologic diagnosis and prognostic factors.

Comparison of Biexponential and Monoexponential DWI in Evaluation of Fuhrman Grading of Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma.

Comparison of stretched-exponential and monoexponential models of diffusion-weighted imaging between prostate cancer and normal tissues

Multiple mathematical models of diffusion-weighted imaging for endometrial cancer characterization: Correlation with prognosis-related risk factors

Monoexponential, biexponential, stretched-exponential and kurtosis models of diffusion-weighted imaging in kidney assessment: comparison between patients with primary aldosteronism and healthy controls

Comparison of Biexponential and Monoexponential Model of Diffusion-Weighted Imaging for Distinguishing Between Common Renal Cell Carcinoma and Fat Poor Angiomyolipoma

Comparison of the monoexponential and biexponential models of diffusion-weighted magnetic imaging in grading clear-cell renal cell carcinoma: a case-control study

Preliminary Study of Monoexponential, Biexponential, and Stretched-Exponential Models of Diffusion-Weighted MRI and Diffusion Kurtosis Imaging on Differential Diagnosis of Spinal Metastases and Chordoma

Application of advanced diffusion models from diffusion weighted imaging in a large cohort study of breast lesions

Utilization of diffusion-weighted derived mathematical models to predict prognostic factors of resectable rectal cancer

Comparing of Mono-Exponential, Bi-Exponential and Stretched Exponential Models with Multi-B Value Diffusion Weighed Imaging in Uterus Malignancies¡apilot Study

Use of monoexponential diffusion-weighted imaging and diffusion kurtosis imaging and dynamic contrast-enhanced-MRI for the differentiation of spinal tumors

A comparative study of mono-exponential and advanced diffusion-weighted imaging in differentiating stage IA endometrial carcinoma from benign endometrial lesions