Cargando…

Follow-up assessment of vestibular schwannomas: volume quantification versus two-dimensional measurements

INTRODUCTION: A conservative treatment strategy is often proposed as a primary treatment option in the management of vestibular schwannomas (VS). In this “wait and scan” policy, audiovestibular symptoms are monitored regularly, and VS growth is measured on consecutive magnetic resonance images (MRI)...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: van de Langenberg, Rick, de Bondt, Bert Jan, Nelemans, Patty J., Baumert, Brigitta G., Stokroos, Robert J.
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer-Verlag 2009
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2710491/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19418046
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00234-009-0529-4
_version_ 1782169379952132096
author van de Langenberg, Rick
de Bondt, Bert Jan
Nelemans, Patty J.
Baumert, Brigitta G.
Stokroos, Robert J.
author_facet van de Langenberg, Rick
de Bondt, Bert Jan
Nelemans, Patty J.
Baumert, Brigitta G.
Stokroos, Robert J.
author_sort van de Langenberg, Rick
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: A conservative treatment strategy is often proposed as a primary treatment option in the management of vestibular schwannomas (VS). In this “wait and scan” policy, audiovestibular symptoms are monitored regularly, and VS growth is measured on consecutive magnetic resonance images (MRI). The aim of this study is validation of two-dimensional versus volume MRI assessment in the longitudinal follow-up of VS and to define tumor growth beyond measurement error. METHODS: MRI scans of 68 consecutive patients with VS were analyzed retrospectively. Two-dimensional and volume measurements on contrast enhanced (CE) T1- and T2-weighted images were performed independently by two readers. Smallest detectable differences (SDD) were calculated, and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were determined for both assessment methods. RESULTS: Two-dimensional and volume measurements both showed best reproducibility on CE T1-weighted images. SDD for differences relative to baseline MRI [SDD (%)] for two-dimensional measurements had a higher interobserver error compared to volume measurements (40% versus 19.7%), which decreases when tumor size increases. The ICC for two-dimensional measurements in three directions was 0.947, 0.974, and 0.978 and for volume measurements 0.999. CONCLUSION: Volume measurements are more accurate compared to two-dimensional measurements for the evaluation of VS growth. These measurements are assessed preferably on CE T1-weighted images. SDD (%) strongly depends on VS size. SDD between consecutive scans exceeds the common clinical applied criterion of 1 or 2 mm growth to define growth.
format Text
id pubmed-2710491
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2009
publisher Springer-Verlag
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-27104912009-07-16 Follow-up assessment of vestibular schwannomas: volume quantification versus two-dimensional measurements van de Langenberg, Rick de Bondt, Bert Jan Nelemans, Patty J. Baumert, Brigitta G. Stokroos, Robert J. Neuroradiology Diagnostic Neuroradiology INTRODUCTION: A conservative treatment strategy is often proposed as a primary treatment option in the management of vestibular schwannomas (VS). In this “wait and scan” policy, audiovestibular symptoms are monitored regularly, and VS growth is measured on consecutive magnetic resonance images (MRI). The aim of this study is validation of two-dimensional versus volume MRI assessment in the longitudinal follow-up of VS and to define tumor growth beyond measurement error. METHODS: MRI scans of 68 consecutive patients with VS were analyzed retrospectively. Two-dimensional and volume measurements on contrast enhanced (CE) T1- and T2-weighted images were performed independently by two readers. Smallest detectable differences (SDD) were calculated, and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were determined for both assessment methods. RESULTS: Two-dimensional and volume measurements both showed best reproducibility on CE T1-weighted images. SDD for differences relative to baseline MRI [SDD (%)] for two-dimensional measurements had a higher interobserver error compared to volume measurements (40% versus 19.7%), which decreases when tumor size increases. The ICC for two-dimensional measurements in three directions was 0.947, 0.974, and 0.978 and for volume measurements 0.999. CONCLUSION: Volume measurements are more accurate compared to two-dimensional measurements for the evaluation of VS growth. These measurements are assessed preferably on CE T1-weighted images. SDD (%) strongly depends on VS size. SDD between consecutive scans exceeds the common clinical applied criterion of 1 or 2 mm growth to define growth. Springer-Verlag 2009-05-06 2009-08 /pmc/articles/PMC2710491/ /pubmed/19418046 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00234-009-0529-4 Text en © The Author(s) 2009
spellingShingle Diagnostic Neuroradiology
van de Langenberg, Rick
de Bondt, Bert Jan
Nelemans, Patty J.
Baumert, Brigitta G.
Stokroos, Robert J.
Follow-up assessment of vestibular schwannomas: volume quantification versus two-dimensional measurements
title Follow-up assessment of vestibular schwannomas: volume quantification versus two-dimensional measurements
title_full Follow-up assessment of vestibular schwannomas: volume quantification versus two-dimensional measurements
title_fullStr Follow-up assessment of vestibular schwannomas: volume quantification versus two-dimensional measurements
title_full_unstemmed Follow-up assessment of vestibular schwannomas: volume quantification versus two-dimensional measurements
title_short Follow-up assessment of vestibular schwannomas: volume quantification versus two-dimensional measurements
title_sort follow-up assessment of vestibular schwannomas: volume quantification versus two-dimensional measurements
topic Diagnostic Neuroradiology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2710491/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19418046
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00234-009-0529-4
work_keys_str_mv AT vandelangenbergrick followupassessmentofvestibularschwannomasvolumequantificationversustwodimensionalmeasurements
AT debondtbertjan followupassessmentofvestibularschwannomasvolumequantificationversustwodimensionalmeasurements
AT nelemanspattyj followupassessmentofvestibularschwannomasvolumequantificationversustwodimensionalmeasurements
AT baumertbrigittag followupassessmentofvestibularschwannomasvolumequantificationversustwodimensionalmeasurements
AT stokroosrobertj followupassessmentofvestibularschwannomasvolumequantificationversustwodimensionalmeasurements