001     168526
005     20240229133610.0
024 7 _ |a 10.1016/j.mri.2021.04.006
|2 doi
024 7 _ |a pmid:33905830
|2 pmid
024 7 _ |a 0730-725X
|2 ISSN
024 7 _ |a 1873-5894
|2 ISSN
024 7 _ |a altmetric:104901261
|2 altmetric
037 _ _ |a DKFZ-2021-00958
041 _ _ |a English
082 _ _ |a 610
100 1 _ |a Mokry, Theresa
|b 0
245 _ _ |a Diffusivity mapping of the ovaries: Variability of apparent diffusion and kurtosis variables over the menstrual cycle and influence of oral contraceptives.
260 _ _ |a Amsterdam [u.a.]
|c 2021
|b Elsevier Science
336 7 _ |a article
|2 DRIVER
336 7 _ |a Output Types/Journal article
|2 DataCite
336 7 _ |a Journal Article
|b journal
|m journal
|0 PUB:(DE-HGF)16
|s 1638885195_22608
|2 PUB:(DE-HGF)
336 7 _ |a ARTICLE
|2 BibTeX
336 7 _ |a JOURNAL_ARTICLE
|2 ORCID
336 7 _ |a Journal Article
|0 0
|2 EndNote
500 _ _ |a #LA:E010# /2021 Jul;80:50-57
520 _ _ |a We aimed to investigate whether quantitative diffusivity variables of healthy ovaries vary during the menstrual cycle and to evaluate alterations in women using oral contraceptives (OC).This prospective study (S-339/2016) included 30 healthy female volunteers, with (n = 15) and without (n = 15) intake of OC between 07/2017 and 09/2019. Participants underwent 3T diffusion-weighted MRI (b-values 0-2000 s/mm2) three times during a menstrual cycle (T1 = day 1-5; T2 = day 7-12; T3 = day 19-24). Both ovaries were manually three-dimensionally segmented on b = 1500 s/mm2; apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) calculation and kurtosis fitting (Dapp, Kapp) were performed. Differences in ADC, Dapp and Kapp between time points and groups were compared using repeated measures ANOVA and t-test after Shapiro-Wilk and Brown-Forsythe test for normality and equal variance.In women with a natural menstrual cycle, ADC and kurtosis variables showed significant changes in ovaries with the dominant follicle between T1 vs T2 and T1 vs T3, whilst no differences were observed between T2 vs T3: ADC ± SD for T1 1.524 ± 0.160, T2 1.737 ± 0.160, and T3 1.747 ± 0.241 μm2/ms (p = 0.01 T2 vs T1; p = 1.0 T2 vs T3, p = 0.003 T3 vs T1); Dapp ± SD for T1 2.018 ± 0.140, T2 2.272 ± 0.189, and T3 2.230 ± 0.256 μm2/ms (p = 0.003 T2 vs T1, p = 1.0 T2 vs T3, p = 0.02 T3 vs T1); Kapp ± SD for T1 0.614 ± 0.0339, T2 0.546 ± 0.0637, and T3 0.529 ± 0.0567 (p < 0.001 T2 vs T1, p = 0.86 T2 vs T3, p < 0.001 T3 vs T1). No significant differences were found in the contralateral ovaries or in females taking OC.Physiological cycle-dependent changes in quantitative diffusivity variables of ovaries should be considered especially when interpreting radiomics analyses in reproductive women.
536 _ _ |a 315 - Bildgebung und Radioonkologie (POF4-315)
|0 G:(DE-HGF)POF4-315
|c POF4-315
|f POF IV
|x 0
588 _ _ |a Dataset connected to CrossRef, PubMed, , Journals: inrepo01.inet.dkfz-heidelberg.de
650 _ 7 |a Cyclic changes
|2 Other
650 _ 7 |a Diffusion kurtosis imaging
|2 Other
650 _ 7 |a Diffusion-weighted imaging
|2 Other
650 _ 7 |a Menstrual cycle
|2 Other
650 _ 7 |a Oral contraceptives
|2 Other
650 _ 7 |a Ovary
|2 Other
700 1 _ |a Pantke, Judith
|b 1
700 1 _ |a Mlynarska-Bujny, Anna
|0 P:(DE-He78)f2017cf9c3356b8a6babaa5943f1e99e
|b 2
700 1 _ |a Hasse, Felix Christian
|b 3
700 1 _ |a Kuder, Tristan Anselm
|0 P:(DE-He78)59dfdd0ee0a7f0db81535f0781a3a6d6
|b 4
|u dkfz
700 1 _ |a Schlemmer, Heinz-Peter
|0 P:(DE-He78)3d04c8fee58c9ab71f62ff80d06b6fec
|b 5
700 1 _ |a Kauczor, Hans-Ulrich
|b 6
700 1 _ |a Rom, Joachim
|b 7
700 1 _ |a Bickelhaupt, Sebastian
|0 P:(DE-He78)d2d971750bce6217eb90fff9b01e61f9
|b 8
|e Last author
773 _ _ |a 10.1016/j.mri.2021.04.006
|g p. S0730725X21000643
|0 PERI:(DE-600)1500646-3
|p 50-57
|t Magnetic resonance imaging
|v 80
|y 2021
|x 0730-725X
909 C O |p VDB
|o oai:inrepo02.dkfz.de:168526
910 1 _ |a Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum
|0 I:(DE-588b)2036810-0
|k DKFZ
|b 2
|6 P:(DE-He78)f2017cf9c3356b8a6babaa5943f1e99e
910 1 _ |a Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum
|0 I:(DE-588b)2036810-0
|k DKFZ
|b 4
|6 P:(DE-He78)59dfdd0ee0a7f0db81535f0781a3a6d6
910 1 _ |a Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum
|0 I:(DE-588b)2036810-0
|k DKFZ
|b 5
|6 P:(DE-He78)3d04c8fee58c9ab71f62ff80d06b6fec
910 1 _ |a Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum
|0 I:(DE-588b)2036810-0
|k DKFZ
|b 8
|6 P:(DE-He78)d2d971750bce6217eb90fff9b01e61f9
913 1 _ |a DE-HGF
|b Gesundheit
|l Krebsforschung
|1 G:(DE-HGF)POF4-310
|0 G:(DE-HGF)POF4-315
|3 G:(DE-HGF)POF4
|2 G:(DE-HGF)POF4-300
|4 G:(DE-HGF)POF
|v Bildgebung und Radioonkologie
|x 0
913 0 _ |a DE-HGF
|b Gesundheit
|l Krebsforschung
|1 G:(DE-HGF)POF3-310
|0 G:(DE-HGF)POF3-315
|3 G:(DE-HGF)POF3
|2 G:(DE-HGF)POF3-300
|4 G:(DE-HGF)POF
|v Imaging and radiooncology
|x 0
914 1 _ |y 2021
915 _ _ |a Nationallizenz
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0420
|2 StatID
|d 2021-01-31
|w ger
915 _ _ |a JCR
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0100
|2 StatID
|b MAGN RESON IMAGING : 2019
|d 2021-01-31
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0200
|2 StatID
|b SCOPUS
|d 2021-01-31
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0300
|2 StatID
|b Medline
|d 2021-01-31
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0600
|2 StatID
|b Ebsco Academic Search
|d 2021-01-31
915 _ _ |a Peer Review
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0030
|2 StatID
|b ASC
|d 2021-01-31
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0199
|2 StatID
|b Clarivate Analytics Master Journal List
|d 2021-01-31
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0160
|2 StatID
|b Essential Science Indicators
|d 2021-01-31
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)1110
|2 StatID
|b Current Contents - Clinical Medicine
|d 2021-01-31
915 _ _ |a WoS
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0113
|2 StatID
|b Science Citation Index Expanded
|d 2021-01-31
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0150
|2 StatID
|b Web of Science Core Collection
|d 2021-01-31
915 _ _ |a IF < 5
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)9900
|2 StatID
|d 2021-01-31
920 1 _ |0 I:(DE-He78)E010-20160331
|k E010
|l E010 Radiologie
|x 0
920 1 _ |0 I:(DE-He78)E020-20160331
|k E020
|l E020 Med. Physik in der Radiologie
|x 1
980 _ _ |a journal
980 _ _ |a VDB
980 _ _ |a I:(DE-He78)E010-20160331
980 _ _ |a I:(DE-He78)E020-20160331
980 _ _ |a UNRESTRICTED


LibraryCollectionCLSMajorCLSMinorLanguageAuthor
Marc 21