Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 6, 2025
Quantification of Vascular Parameters in Whole Mount Retinas of Mice with Non-Proliferative and Proliferative Retinopathies
Published on: March 12, 2022
Comparison of HASTE versus EPI-Based DWI for Retinoblastoma and Correlation with Prognostic Histopathologic
Manish Sharma1, Amit Gupta1, Manisha Jana1
1From the Department of Radiodiagnosis and Interventional Radiology (M.S., A.G., M.J., S.S.), All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India.
Background And Purpose:
Non-EPI-based DWI has shown better performance in head and neck pathologies owing to lesser susceptibility artifacts compared with EPI-DWI. However, only sporadic studies have investigated the feasibility of non-EPI-based DWI in retinoblastoma (RB). We qualitatively and quantitively compared EPI-DWI and HASTE-DWI in RB and correlated the tumor ADC values obtained from these 2 techniques with histopathologic markers.
Materials And Methods:
Twenty-one treatment-naive patients with RB underwent 1.5T orbital MR imaging. EPI-DWI and HASTE-DWI were acquired at 3 b-values (0, 500, and 1000 s/mm2). All patients subsequently underwent surgical enucleation. For qualitative image assessment, scoring of overall image quality, artifacts, tumor sharpness, and tumor conspicuity was done by using a 5-point Likert scale. Quantitative assessment included calculations of SNR, contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), geometric distortion, and ADC. Qualitative scores were compared by using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test, and quantitative parameters were analyzed with a t test.
Results:
All 21 patients had unilateral RB; 15 were male and 6 were female with a median age of 36 months (range, 9-72 months). On histopathology, patients had either poorly differentiated (n = 13/21) or moderately differentiated (n = 8/21) RB. Other poor prognostic markers evaluated were optic nerve invasion (n = 10/21), choroidal invasion (n = 12/21), and anterior eye segment enhancement on MRI (n = 6/21). HASTE-DWI demonstrated higher image quality scores than EPI-DWI (P < .01), except for tumor conspicuity score, which was higher for EPI-DWI (P < .001). HASTE-DWI showed lower SNR, CNR, and geometric distortion than EPI-DWI (P < .001). The average acquisition times of EPI-DWI and HASTE-DWI were ∼1 and 14 minutes, respectively. The mean tumor ADC value on EPI-DWI was 0.62 ± 0.14 × 10-3 mm2/s and on HASTE-DWI was 0.83 ± 0.17 × 10-3 mm2/s. A significant correlation between EPI-DWI and HASTE-DWI ADC values (r = 0.8; P = .01) was found. Lower ADC values were found in tumors with poor prognostic markers, but none reached a statistically significant difference.
Conclusions:
HASTE-DWI shows improved overall image quality; however, it lacks in terms of tumor conspicuity, SNR, CNR, and longer acquisition time compared with EPI-DWI. ADC values derived from HASTE-DWI show no advantage over EPI-DWI in correlation with histopathologic prognostic markers.
