Literature DB >> 27332779

Diagnostic Value of Fractal Analysis for the Differentiation of Brain Tumors Using 3-Tesla Magnetic Resonance Susceptibility-Weighted Imaging.

Antonio Di Ieva1, Pierre-Jean Le Reste, Béatrice Carsin-Nicol, Jean-Christophe Ferre, Michael D Cusimano.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Susceptibility-weighted imaging (SWI) of brain tumors provides information about neoplastic vasculature and intratumoral micro- and macrobleedings. Low- and high-grade gliomas can be distinguished by SWI due to their different vascular characteristics. Fractal analysis allows for quantification of these radiological differences by a computer-based morphological assessment of SWI patterns.
OBJECTIVE: To show the feasibility of SWI analysis on 3-T magnetic resonance imaging to distinguish different kinds of brain tumors.
METHODS: Seventy-eight patients affected by brain tumors of different histopathology (low- and high-grade gliomas, metastases, meningiomas, lymphomas) were included. All patients underwent preoperative 3-T magnetic resonance imaging including SWI, on which the lesions were contoured. The images underwent automated computation, extracting 2 quantitative parameters: the volume fraction of SWI signals within the tumors (signal ratio) and the morphological self-similar features (fractal dimension [FD]). The results were then correlated with each histopathological type of tumor.
RESULTS: Signal ratio and FD were able to differentiate low-grade gliomas from grade III and IV gliomas, metastases, and meningiomas (P < .05). FD was statistically different between lymphomas and high-grade gliomas (P < .05). A receiver-operating characteristic analysis showed that the optimal cutoff value for differentiating low- from high-grade gliomas was 1.75 for FD (sensitivity, 81%; specificity, 89%) and 0.03 for signal ratio (sensitivity, 80%; specificity, 86%).
CONCLUSION: FD of SWI on 3-T magnetic resonance imaging is a novel image biomarker for glioma grading and brain tumor characterization. Computational models offer promising results that may improve diagnosis and open perspectives in the radiological assessment of brain tumors. ABBREVIATIONS: FD, fractal dimensionSR, signal ratioSWI, susceptibility-weighted imaging.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27332779     DOI: 10.1227/NEU.0000000000001308

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neurosurgery        ISSN: 0148-396X            Impact factor:   4.654


  9 in total

Review 1.  A healthy dose of chaos: Using fractal frameworks for engineering higher-fidelity biomedical systems.

Authors:  Anastasia Korolj; Hau-Tieng Wu; Milica Radisic
Journal:  Biomaterials       Date:  2019-07-15       Impact factor: 12.479

2.  MR imaging based fractal analysis for differentiating primary CNS lymphoma and glioblastoma.

Authors:  Shuai Liu; Xing Fan; Chuanbao Zhang; Zheng Wang; Shaowu Li; Yinyan Wang; Xiaoguang Qiu; Tao Jiang
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2018-08-30       Impact factor: 5.315

3.  Differentiating intracranial solitary fibrous tumor/hemangiopericytoma from meningioma using diffusion-weighted imaging and susceptibility-weighted imaging.

Authors:  Tanhui Chen; Bingqing Jiang; Yingyan Zheng; Dejun She; Hua Zhang; Zhen Xing; Dairong Cao
Journal:  Neuroradiology       Date:  2019-10-31       Impact factor: 2.804

4.  Spherical coordinates transformation pre-processing in Deep Convolution Neural Networks for brain tumor segmentation in MRI.

Authors:  Carlo Russo; Sidong Liu; Antonio Di Ieva
Journal:  Med Biol Eng Comput       Date:  2021-11-02       Impact factor: 2.602

5.  Relationship between necrotic patterns in glioblastoma and patient survival: fractal dimension and lacunarity analyses using magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  Shuai Liu; Yinyan Wang; Kaibin Xu; Zheng Wang; Xing Fan; Chuanbao Zhang; Shaowu Li; Xiaoguang Qiu; Tao Jiang
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2017-08-16       Impact factor: 4.379

6.  Multi-parametric effect in predicting tumor histological grade by using susceptibility weighted magnetic resonance imaging in tongue squamous cell carcinoma.

Authors:  Xing Yang; Jinyu Zhu; Yongming Dai; Zhen Tian; Gongxin Yang; Huimin Shi; Yingwei Wu; Xiaofeng Tao
Journal:  BMC Med Imaging       Date:  2019-03-12       Impact factor: 1.930

7.  Intratumoral Susceptibility Signals Reflect Biomarker Status in Gliomas.

Authors:  Ling-Wei Kong; Jin Chen; Heng Zhao; Kun Yao; Sheng-Yu Fang; Zheng Wang; Yin-Yan Wang; Shou-Wei Li
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2019-11-19       Impact factor: 4.379

8.  Shape matters: morphological metrics of glioblastoma imaging abnormalities as biomarkers of prognosis.

Authors:  Lee Curtin; Paula Whitmire; Haylye White; Kamila M Bond; Maciej M Mrugala; Leland S Hu; Kristin R Swanson
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-12-01       Impact factor: 4.379

9.  Radiomic Based Machine Learning Performance for a Three Class Problem in Neuro-Oncology: Time to Test the Waters?

Authors:  Sarv Priya; Yanan Liu; Caitlin Ward; Nam H Le; Neetu Soni; Ravishankar Pillenahalli Maheshwarappa; Varun Monga; Honghai Zhang; Milan Sonka; Girish Bathla
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2021-05-24       Impact factor: 6.639

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.