New Software for Preoperative Diagnostics of Meningeal Tumor Histologic Types

详细信息    查看全文

• 作者：Alexey L. Krivoshapkin¹ ; ^{alkr01@yandex.ru" class="auth_mail" title="E-mail the corresponding author} ; Gleb S. Sergeev² ; Leonid E. Kalneus³ ; Alekey S. Gaytan¹ ; Vladimir I. Murtazin⁴ ; Vladislav P. Kurbatov⁵ ; Alexander M. Volkov⁶ ; Diana V. Kostromskaya⁶ ; Sergey M. Pyatov⁷ ; Michael E. Amelin⁸ ; Abdyrakman R. Duishobaev⁷
• 关键词：Histologic type ; Meningeal tumors ; Software for MRI
• 刊名：World Neurosurgery
• 出版年：2016
• 出版时间：June 2016
• 年：2016
• 卷：90
• 期：Complete
• 页码：123-132
• 全文大小：4974 K

文摘

Meningeal tumors are neoplasms with different histologic manifestations of both benign and malignant types that determine the prognosis of tumor recurrence and its consistency. The risk of surgical treatment depends on the location, size, and consistency of the tumor. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) sequences can be used to identify the features of tumors, but these MRI characteristics are not well understood. The present study describes an advanced mathematical algorithm to analyze MRI data and distinguish histologic types of meningeal tumors before surgery.

Methods

Forty-eight patients underwent surgical removal of meningeal brain tumor. All patients had preoperative MRI with a 1.5-T scanner. One radiologist and 2 neurosurgeons evaluated MRI histogram peaks of the whole tumor volume using the advanced computer algorithm.

Results

Three specialists received the following mean value of histogram peaks: 15.99 ± 0.23 (± standard error of the mean [SEM]) for meningoteliomatous meningiomas; 21.24 ± 0.3 (±SEM) for fibroplastic meningiomas; 19.0 ± 0.28 (±SEM) for transitional meningiomas; 10.7 ± 0.27 (±SEM) for anatypical, anaplastic meningiomas, 11.03 ± 0.51 (±SEM) for primary intracranial fibrosarcomas and 25.72 ± 0.29 (±SEM) for meningeal hemangiopericytomas. A one-way analysis of variance test proved the difference between group means: F = 70.138, P < 0.01. The Tukey test and the Games-Howell test indicated that the difference between the tumor groups was significant. Mean deviation in agreement index between specialists was 0.98 ± 0.007 (±SEM).

Conclusions

The advanced algorithm proved high specificity, sensitivity, and interoperator repeatability.