Kai-Wei Han1, Dan-Feng Zhang1, Ji-Gang Chen1, Li-Jun Hou2. 1. Department of Neurosurgery, Shanghai neurosurgical institute, Changzheng Hospital, Shanghai, China. 2. Department of Neurosurgery, Shanghai neurosurgical institute, Changzheng Hospital, Shanghai, China. shczsjwk11@126.com.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To explore whether segmentation and 3D modeling are more accurate in the preoperative detection of the neurovascular relationship (NVR) in patients with trigeminal neuralgia (TN) compared to MRI fast imaging employing steady-state acquisition (FIESTA). METHOD: Segmentation and 3D modeling using 3D Slicer were conducted for 40 patients undergoing MRI FIESTA and microsurgical vascular decompression (MVD). The NVR, as well as the offending vessel determined by MRI FIESTA and 3D Slicer, was reviewed and compared with intraoperative manifestations using SPSS. RESULTS: The k agreement between the MRI FIESTA and operation in determining the NVR was 0.232 and that between the 3D modeling and operation was 0.6333. There was no significant difference between these two procedures (χ2 = 8.09, P = 0.088). The k agreement between the MRI FIESTA and operation in determining the offending vessel was 0.373, and that between the 3D modeling and operation was 0.922. There were significant differences between two of them (χ2 = 82.01, P = 0.000). The sensitivity and specificity for MRI FIESTA in determining the NVR were 87.2 % and 100 %, respectively, and for 3D modeling were both 100 %. CONCLUSION: The segmentation and 3D modeling were more accurate than MRI FIESTA in preoperative verification of the NVR and offending vessel. This was consistent with surgical manifestations and was more helpful for the preoperative decision and surgical plan.
OBJECTIVE: To explore whether segmentation and 3D modeling are more accurate in the preoperative detection of the neurovascular relationship (NVR) in patients with trigeminal neuralgia (TN) compared to MRI fast imaging employing steady-state acquisition (FIESTA). METHOD: Segmentation and 3D modeling using 3D Slicer were conducted for 40 patients undergoing MRI FIESTA and microsurgical vascular decompression (MVD). The NVR, as well as the offending vessel determined by MRI FIESTA and 3D Slicer, was reviewed and compared with intraoperative manifestations using SPSS. RESULTS: The k agreement between the MRI FIESTA and operation in determining the NVR was 0.232 and that between the 3D modeling and operation was 0.6333. There was no significant difference between these two procedures (χ2 = 8.09, P = 0.088). The k agreement between the MRI FIESTA and operation in determining the offending vessel was 0.373, and that between the 3D modeling and operation was 0.922. There were significant differences between two of them (χ2 = 82.01, P = 0.000). The sensitivity and specificity for MRI FIESTA in determining the NVR were 87.2 % and 100 %, respectively, and for 3D modeling were both 100 %. CONCLUSION: The segmentation and 3D modeling were more accurate than MRI FIESTA in preoperative verification of the NVR and offending vessel. This was consistent with surgical manifestations and was more helpful for the preoperative decision and surgical plan.
Entities:
Keywords:
3D modeling; 3D slicer; MRI FIESTA; Neurovascular relationship; Offending vessel; Trigeminal neuralgia