Table 1.
Patient demographics, disease parameters and treatment.
ISS, international staging system; DS-PLUS, PAD, bortezomib, doxorubicin, dexamethasone; CVD, cyclophosphamide, bortezomib, dexamethasone; VTD, bortezomib, thalidomide, bortezomib.dexamethasone; MPV, melphalan, prednisolone, bortezomib.
Table 2.
Sequence parameters.
Fig 1.
Study design.
Fig 2.
There is a large focal lesion in the right ischium (solid arrow) and a smaller lesion in the right ilium (dashed arrow); both lesions are shown on unenhanced Dixon images (IP, OP, WO and FO) and on the reference images (consisting of DWI and post-contrast). The smaller lesion is less conspicuous on the IP and OP images than on the FO and WO images. *DWI was acquired in the axial plane; the smaller of the two lesions (in the right ilium) is again marked with a dashed arrow.
Fig 3.
Lesion count, sensitivity, positive predictive value (PPV) and confidence for each Dixon image type.
Individual observers are shown in colour (see legend), and the mean value across all four observers is shown in black. Error bars indicate the 95% confidence interval.
Table 3.
Results of regression analysis (n = 30).
Table 4.
Results of regression analysis for the focal lesion group alone (n = 23).
Table 5.
Results of regression analysis for the diffuse disease group (n = 6).
Fig 4.
Comparison of percent contrast and CNR between groups.
The figures show the results of a post-hoc multiple comparison test from a one-way ANOVA. Estimates of Percent Contrast and CNR are shown as circles; the comparison intervals for each group are shown as solid lines. Percent contrast was significantly higher on FO images than on IP images (p = 0.003).