BACKGROUND: Computed-assisted three-dimensional data (3D) allows for an accurate evaluation of volumes compared with traditional measurements. AIMS: An in vitro method comparison between geometric volume and 3D volumetry to obtain reference data for pituitary volumes in normal pituitary glands (PGs) and PGs containing adenomas. DESIGN: Prospective, transverse, analytical study. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-eight subjects underwent brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with 3D sequencing for computer-aided volumetry. PG phantom volumes by both methods were compared. Using the best volumetric method, volumes of normal PGs and PGs with adenoma were compared. Statistical analysis used the Bland-Altman method, t-statistics, effect size and linear regression analysis. RESULTS: Method comparison between 3D volumetry and geometric volume revealed a lower bias and precision for 3D volumetry. A total of 27 patients exhibited normal PGs (mean age, 42.07 ± 16.17 years), although length, height, width, geometric volume and 3D volumetry were greater in women than in men. A total of 21 patients exhibited adenomas (mean age 39.62 ± 10.79 years), and length, height, width, geometric volume and 3D volumetry were greater in men than in women, with significant volumetric differences. Age did not influence pituitary volumes on linear regression analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Results from the present study showed that 3D volumetry was more accurate than the geometric method. In addition, the upper normal limits of PGs overlapped with lower volume limits during early stage microadenomas.
BACKGROUND: Computed-assisted three-dimensional data (3D) allows for an accurate evaluation of volumes compared with traditional measurements. AIMS: An in vitro method comparison between geometric volume and 3D volumetry to obtain reference data for pituitary volumes in normal pituitary glands (PGs) and PGs containing adenomas. DESIGN: Prospective, transverse, analytical study. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-eight subjects underwent brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with 3D sequencing for computer-aided volumetry. PG phantom volumes by both methods were compared. Using the best volumetric method, volumes of normal PGs and PGs with adenoma were compared. Statistical analysis used the Bland-Altman method, t-statistics, effect size and linear regression analysis. RESULTS: Method comparison between 3D volumetry and geometric volume revealed a lower bias and precision for 3D volumetry. A total of 27 patients exhibited normal PGs (mean age, 42.07 ± 16.17 years), although length, height, width, geometric volume and 3D volumetry were greater in women than in men. A total of 21 patients exhibited adenomas (mean age 39.62 ± 10.79 years), and length, height, width, geometric volume and 3D volumetry were greater in men than in women, with significant volumetric differences. Age did not influence pituitary volumes on linear regression analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Results from the present study showed that 3D volumetry was more accurate than the geometric method. In addition, the upper normal limits of PGs overlapped with lower volume limits during early stage microadenomas.