Cargando…

A comparison of semi-automated volumetric vs linear measurement of small vestibular schwannomas

OBJECTIVE: Accurate and precise measurement of vestibular schwannoma (VS) size is key to clinical management decisions. Linear measurements are used in routine clinical practice but are prone to measurement error. This study aims to compare a semi-automated volume segmentation tool against standard...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: MacKeith, Samuel, Das, Tilak, Graves, Martin, Patterson, Andrew, Donnelly, Neil, Mannion, Richard, Axon, Patrick, Tysome, James
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5838150/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29335780
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00405-018-4865-z
_version_ 1783304196789895168
author MacKeith, Samuel
Das, Tilak
Graves, Martin
Patterson, Andrew
Donnelly, Neil
Mannion, Richard
Axon, Patrick
Tysome, James
author_facet MacKeith, Samuel
Das, Tilak
Graves, Martin
Patterson, Andrew
Donnelly, Neil
Mannion, Richard
Axon, Patrick
Tysome, James
author_sort MacKeith, Samuel
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: Accurate and precise measurement of vestibular schwannoma (VS) size is key to clinical management decisions. Linear measurements are used in routine clinical practice but are prone to measurement error. This study aims to compare a semi-automated volume segmentation tool against standard linear method for measuring small VS. This study also examines whether oblique tumour orientation can contribute to linear measurement error. STUDY DESIGN: Experimental comparison of observer agreement using two measurement techniques. SETTING: Tertiary skull base unit. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-four patients with unilateral sporadic small (< 15 mm maximum intracranial dimension) VS imaged with 1 mm-thickness T1-weighted Gadolinium enhanced MRI. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: (1) Intra and inter-observer intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC), repeatability coefficients (RC), and relative smallest detectable difference (%SDD). (2) Mean change in maximum linear dimension following reformatting to correct for oblique orientation of VS. RESULTS: Intra-observer ICC was higher for semi-automated volumetric when compared with linear measurements, 0.998 (95% CI 0.994–0.999) vs 0.936 (95% CI 0.856–0.972), p < 0.0001. Inter-observer ICC was also higher for volumetric vs linear measurements, 0.989 (95% CI 0.975–0.995) vs 0.946 (95% CI 0.880–0.976), p = 0.0045. The intra-observer %SDD was similar for volumetric and linear measurements, 9.9% vs 11.8%. However, the inter-observer %SDD was greater for volumetric than linear measurements, 20.1% vs 10.6%. Following oblique reformatting to correct tumour angulation, the mean increase in size was 1.14 mm (p = 0.04). CONCLUSION: Semi-automated volumetric measurements are more repeatable than linear measurements when measuring small VS and should be considered for use in clinical practice. Oblique orientation of VS may contribute to linear measurement error.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5838150
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-58381502018-03-09 A comparison of semi-automated volumetric vs linear measurement of small vestibular schwannomas MacKeith, Samuel Das, Tilak Graves, Martin Patterson, Andrew Donnelly, Neil Mannion, Richard Axon, Patrick Tysome, James Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol Otology OBJECTIVE: Accurate and precise measurement of vestibular schwannoma (VS) size is key to clinical management decisions. Linear measurements are used in routine clinical practice but are prone to measurement error. This study aims to compare a semi-automated volume segmentation tool against standard linear method for measuring small VS. This study also examines whether oblique tumour orientation can contribute to linear measurement error. STUDY DESIGN: Experimental comparison of observer agreement using two measurement techniques. SETTING: Tertiary skull base unit. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-four patients with unilateral sporadic small (< 15 mm maximum intracranial dimension) VS imaged with 1 mm-thickness T1-weighted Gadolinium enhanced MRI. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: (1) Intra and inter-observer intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC), repeatability coefficients (RC), and relative smallest detectable difference (%SDD). (2) Mean change in maximum linear dimension following reformatting to correct for oblique orientation of VS. RESULTS: Intra-observer ICC was higher for semi-automated volumetric when compared with linear measurements, 0.998 (95% CI 0.994–0.999) vs 0.936 (95% CI 0.856–0.972), p < 0.0001. Inter-observer ICC was also higher for volumetric vs linear measurements, 0.989 (95% CI 0.975–0.995) vs 0.946 (95% CI 0.880–0.976), p = 0.0045. The intra-observer %SDD was similar for volumetric and linear measurements, 9.9% vs 11.8%. However, the inter-observer %SDD was greater for volumetric than linear measurements, 20.1% vs 10.6%. Following oblique reformatting to correct tumour angulation, the mean increase in size was 1.14 mm (p = 0.04). CONCLUSION: Semi-automated volumetric measurements are more repeatable than linear measurements when measuring small VS and should be considered for use in clinical practice. Oblique orientation of VS may contribute to linear measurement error. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2018-01-15 2018 /pmc/articles/PMC5838150/ /pubmed/29335780 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00405-018-4865-z Text en © The Author(s) 2018 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
spellingShingle Otology
MacKeith, Samuel
Das, Tilak
Graves, Martin
Patterson, Andrew
Donnelly, Neil
Mannion, Richard
Axon, Patrick
Tysome, James
A comparison of semi-automated volumetric vs linear measurement of small vestibular schwannomas
title A comparison of semi-automated volumetric vs linear measurement of small vestibular schwannomas
title_full A comparison of semi-automated volumetric vs linear measurement of small vestibular schwannomas
title_fullStr A comparison of semi-automated volumetric vs linear measurement of small vestibular schwannomas
title_full_unstemmed A comparison of semi-automated volumetric vs linear measurement of small vestibular schwannomas
title_short A comparison of semi-automated volumetric vs linear measurement of small vestibular schwannomas
title_sort comparison of semi-automated volumetric vs linear measurement of small vestibular schwannomas
topic Otology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5838150/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29335780
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00405-018-4865-z
work_keys_str_mv AT mackeithsamuel acomparisonofsemiautomatedvolumetricvslinearmeasurementofsmallvestibularschwannomas
AT dastilak acomparisonofsemiautomatedvolumetricvslinearmeasurementofsmallvestibularschwannomas
AT gravesmartin acomparisonofsemiautomatedvolumetricvslinearmeasurementofsmallvestibularschwannomas
AT pattersonandrew acomparisonofsemiautomatedvolumetricvslinearmeasurementofsmallvestibularschwannomas
AT donnellyneil acomparisonofsemiautomatedvolumetricvslinearmeasurementofsmallvestibularschwannomas
AT mannionrichard acomparisonofsemiautomatedvolumetricvslinearmeasurementofsmallvestibularschwannomas
AT axonpatrick acomparisonofsemiautomatedvolumetricvslinearmeasurementofsmallvestibularschwannomas
AT tysomejames acomparisonofsemiautomatedvolumetricvslinearmeasurementofsmallvestibularschwannomas
AT mackeithsamuel comparisonofsemiautomatedvolumetricvslinearmeasurementofsmallvestibularschwannomas
AT dastilak comparisonofsemiautomatedvolumetricvslinearmeasurementofsmallvestibularschwannomas
AT gravesmartin comparisonofsemiautomatedvolumetricvslinearmeasurementofsmallvestibularschwannomas
AT pattersonandrew comparisonofsemiautomatedvolumetricvslinearmeasurementofsmallvestibularschwannomas
AT donnellyneil comparisonofsemiautomatedvolumetricvslinearmeasurementofsmallvestibularschwannomas
AT mannionrichard comparisonofsemiautomatedvolumetricvslinearmeasurementofsmallvestibularschwannomas
AT axonpatrick comparisonofsemiautomatedvolumetricvslinearmeasurementofsmallvestibularschwannomas
AT tysomejames comparisonofsemiautomatedvolumetricvslinearmeasurementofsmallvestibularschwannomas