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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |