INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study is to evaluate the utility of relative cerebral blood volume (rCBV) data from dynamic susceptibility contrast (DSC) perfusion in grading pediatric primary brain tumors. METHODS: A retrospective blinded review of 63 pediatric brain tumors with DSC perfusion was performed independently by two neuroradiologists. A diagnosis of low- versus high-grade tumor was obtained from conventional imaging alone. Maximum rCBV (rCBVmax) was measured from manual ROI placement for each reviewer and averaged. Whole-tumor CBV data was obtained from a semi-automated approach. Results from all three analyses were compared to WHO grade. RESULTS: Based on conventional MRI, the two reviewers had a concordance rate of 81% (k = 0.62). Compared to WHO grade, the concordant cases accurately diagnosed high versus low grade in 82%. A positive correlation was demonstrated between manual rCBVmax and tumor grade (r = 0.30, P = 0.015). ROC analysis of rCBVmax (area under curve 0.65, 0.52-0.77, P = 0.03) gave a low-high threshold of 1.38 with sensitivity of 92% (74-99%), specificity of 40% (24-57%), NPV of 88% (62-98%), and PPV of 50% (35-65%) Using this threshold on 12 discordant tumors between evaluators from conventional imaging yielded correct diagnoses in nine patients. Semi-automated analysis demonstrated statistically significant differences between low- and high-grade tumors for multiple metrics including average rCBV (P = 0.027). CONCLUSIONS: Despite significant positive correlation with tumor grade, rCBV from pediatric brain tumors demonstrates limited specificity, but high NPV in excluding high-grade neoplasms. In selective patients whose conventional imaging is nonspecific, an rCBV threshold may have further diagnostic value.
INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study is to evaluate the utility of relative cerebral blood volume (rCBV) data from dynamic susceptibility contrast (DSC) perfusion in grading pediatric primary brain tumors. METHODS: A retrospective blinded review of 63 pediatric brain tumors with DSC perfusion was performed independently by two neuroradiologists. A diagnosis of low- versus high-grade tumor was obtained from conventional imaging alone. Maximum rCBV (rCBVmax) was measured from manual ROI placement for each reviewer and averaged. Whole-tumor CBV data was obtained from a semi-automated approach. Results from all three analyses were compared to WHO grade. RESULTS: Based on conventional MRI, the two reviewers had a concordance rate of 81% (k = 0.62). Compared to WHO grade, the concordant cases accurately diagnosed high versus low grade in 82%. A positive correlation was demonstrated between manual rCBVmax and tumor grade (r = 0.30, P = 0.015). ROC analysis of rCBVmax (area under curve 0.65, 0.52-0.77, P = 0.03) gave a low-high threshold of 1.38 with sensitivity of 92% (74-99%), specificity of 40% (24-57%), NPV of 88% (62-98%), and PPV of 50% (35-65%) Using this threshold on 12 discordant tumors between evaluators from conventional imaging yielded correct diagnoses in nine patients. Semi-automated analysis demonstrated statistically significant differences between low- and high-grade tumors for multiple metrics including average rCBV (P = 0.027). CONCLUSIONS: Despite significant positive correlation with tumor grade, rCBV from pediatric brain tumors demonstrates limited specificity, but high NPV in excluding high-grade neoplasms. In selective patients whose conventional imaging is nonspecific, an rCBV threshold may have further diagnostic value.
Authors: K W Yeom; L A Mitchell; R M Lober; P D Barnes; H Vogel; P G Fisher; M S Edwards Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2013-08-01 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Michael H Lev; Yelda Ozsunar; John W Henson; Amjad A Rasheed; Glenn D Barest; Griffith R Harsh; Markus M Fitzek; E Antonio Chiocca; James D Rabinov; Andrew N Csavoy; Bruce R Rosen; Fred H Hochberg; Pamela W Schaefer; R Gilberto Gonzalez Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2004-02 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Sylvie D Grand; Stéphane Kremer; Irène M Tropres; Dominique M Hoffmann; Stephan J Chabardes; Virginie Lefournier; François R Berger; Caroline Pasteris; Alexandre Krainik; Basile M Pasquier; Michel Peoch; Jean François Le Bas Journal: Neuroradiology Date: 2007-05-26 Impact factor: 2.804
Authors: B Testud; G Brun; A Varoquaux; J F Hak; R Appay; A Le Troter; N Girard; J P Stellmann Journal: Neuroradiology Date: 2021-01-27 Impact factor: 2.804
Authors: F Dallery; R Bouzerar; D Michel; C Attencourt; V Promelle; J Peltier; J M Constans; O Balédent; C Gondry-Jouet Journal: Neuroradiology Date: 2017-08-31 Impact factor: 2.804
Authors: Stephanie B Withey; Lesley MacPherson; Adam Oates; Stephen Powell; Jan Novak; Laurence Abernethy; Barry Pizer; Richard Grundy; Paul S Morgan; Simon Bailey; Dipayan Mitra; Theodoros N Arvanitis; Dorothee P Auer; Shivaram Avula; Andrew C Peet Journal: Pediatr Radiol Date: 2022-03-15
Authors: Jan Novak; Stephanie Barbara Withey; Shaheen Lateef; Lesley MacPherson; Benjamin Pinkey; Andrew C Peet Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2019-01-03 Impact factor: 3.039