These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Quantitative vs. semiquantitative assessment of intratumoral susceptibility signals in patients with different grades of glioma.
    Author: Bhattacharjee R, Gupta RK, Patir R, Vaishya S, Ahlawat S, Singh A.
    Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging; 2020 Jan; 51(1):225-233. PubMed ID: 31087724.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: Susceptibility weighted imaging (SWI) provides vascular information and plays an important role in improving the diagnostic accuracy of preoperative glioma grading. Intratumoral susceptibility signal intensities (ITSS) obtained from SWI has been used in glioma grading. However, the current method for estimation of ITSS is semiquantitative, manual count-dependent, and includes hemorrhage as well as vasculature. PURPOSE: To develop a quantitative approach that calculates the vasculature volume within tumors by filtering out the hemorrhage from ITSS using R2 * values and connected component analysis-based segmentation algorithm; to evaluate the accuracy of the proposed ITSS vasculature volume (IVV) for differentiating various grades of glioma; and compare it with reported semiquantitative ITSS approach. STUDY TYPE: Retrospective. SUBJECTS: Histopathologically confirmed 41 grade IV, 19 grade III, and 15 grade II glioma patients.Field Strength/Sequence: SWI (four echoes: 5.6, 11.8, 18, 24.2 msec) along with conventional MRI sequences (T2 -weighted, T1 -weighted, 3D-fluid-attenuated inversion recovery [FLAIR], and diffusion-weighted imaging [DWI]) at 3.0T. ASSESSMENT: R2 * relaxation maps were calculated from multiecho SWI. The R2 * cutoff value for hemorrhage ITSS was determined. A segmentation algorithm was designed, based on this R2 * hemorrhage combined with connected component shape analysis, to quantify the IVV from all slices containing tumor by filtering out hemorrhages. Semiquantitative ITSS scoring as well as total ITSS volume (TIV) including hemorrhages were also calculated. STATISTICAL TESTS: One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey-Kramer post-hoc tests were performed to see the difference among the three grades of the tumor (II, III, and IV) in terms of semiquantitative ITSS scoring, TIV, and IVV. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was used to evaluate the performance of the three methods individually in discriminating between grades of glioma. RESULTS: One-way ANOVA showed that only the proposed IVV significantly differentiated different grades of gliomas having visible ITSS. ROC analysis showed that IVV provided the highest AUC for the discrimination of grade II vs. III (0.93), grade III vs. IV (0.98), and grade II vs. IV glioma (0.94). IVV also provided the highest sensitivity and specificity for differentiating grade II vs. III (87.44, 98.41), grade III vs. IV (97.15, 94.12), and grade II vs. IV (98.72, 92.31). DATA CONCLUSION: The proposed quantitative method segregates hemorrhage from tumor vasculature. It scores above the existing semiquantitative method in terms of ITSS estimation and grading accuracy. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4 Technical Efficacy: Stage 2 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2020;51:225-233.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]