Nityanand Miskin1, Prashin Unadkat1,2,3, Michael E Carlton1, Alexandra J Golby1,2, Geoffrey S Young1, Raymond Y Huang1. 1. Department of Radiology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Medical School, Harvard University, Boston, Massachusetts. 2. Department of Neurosurgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Medical School, Harvard University, Boston, Massachusetts. 3. Department of Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Medical School, Harvard University, Boston, Massachusetts.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Intraoperative magnetic resonance imaging (IO-MRI) provides real-time assessment of extent of resection of brain tumor. Development of new enhancement during IO-MRI can confound interpretation of residual enhancing tumor, although the incidence of this finding is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To determine the frequency of new enhancement during brain tumor resection on intraoperative 3 Tesla (3T) MRI. To optimize the postoperative imaging window after brain tumor resection using 1.5 and 3T MRI. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated 64 IO-MRI performed for patients with enhancing brain lesions referred for biopsy or resection as well as a subset with an early postoperative MRI (EP-MRI) within 72 h of surgery (N = 42), and a subset with a late postoperative MRI (LP-MRI) performed between 120 h and 8 wk postsurgery (N = 34). Three radiologists assessed for new enhancement on IO-MRI, and change in enhancement on available EP-MRI and LP-MRI. Consensus was determined by majority response. Inter-rater agreement was assessed using percentage agreement. RESULTS: A total of 10 out of 64 (16%) of the IO-MRI demonstrated new enhancement. Seven of 10 patients with available EP-MRI demonstrated decreased/resolved enhancement. One out of 42 (2%) of the EP-MRI demonstrated new enhancement, which decreased on LP-MRI. Agreement was 74% for the assessment of new enhancement on IO-MRI and 81% for the assessment of new enhancement on the EP-MRI. CONCLUSION: New enhancement occurs in intraoperative 3T MRI in 16% of patients after brain tumor resection, which decreases or resolves on subsequent MRI within 72 h of surgery. Our findings indicate the opportunity for further study to optimize the postoperative imaging window.
BACKGROUND: Intraoperative magnetic resonance imaging (IO-MRI) provides real-time assessment of extent of resection of brain tumor. Development of new enhancement during IO-MRI can confound interpretation of residual enhancing tumor, although the incidence of this finding is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To determine the frequency of new enhancement during brain tumor resection on intraoperative 3 Tesla (3T) MRI. To optimize the postoperative imaging window after brain tumor resection using 1.5 and 3T MRI. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated 64 IO-MRI performed for patients with enhancing brain lesions referred for biopsy or resection as well as a subset with an early postoperative MRI (EP-MRI) within 72 h of surgery (N = 42), and a subset with a late postoperative MRI (LP-MRI) performed between 120 h and 8 wk postsurgery (N = 34). Three radiologists assessed for new enhancement on IO-MRI, and change in enhancement on available EP-MRI and LP-MRI. Consensus was determined by majority response. Inter-rater agreement was assessed using percentage agreement. RESULTS: A total of 10 out of 64 (16%) of the IO-MRI demonstrated new enhancement. Seven of 10 patients with available EP-MRI demonstrated decreased/resolved enhancement. One out of 42 (2%) of the EP-MRI demonstrated new enhancement, which decreased on LP-MRI. Agreement was 74% for the assessment of new enhancement on IO-MRI and 81% for the assessment of new enhancement on the EP-MRI. CONCLUSION: New enhancement occurs in intraoperative 3T MRI in 16% of patients after brain tumor resection, which decreases or resolves on subsequent MRI within 72 h of surgery. Our findings indicate the opportunity for further study to optimize the postoperative imaging window.
Authors: Daniel Thomas Ginat; Brooke Swearingen; William Curry; Daniel Cahill; Joseph Madsen; Pamela W Schaefer Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2014-06 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: G Wilms; M Lammens; G Marchal; P Demaerel; J Verplancke; F Van Calenbergh; J Goffin; C Plets; A L Baert Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 1991 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Edward G Shaw; Brian Berkey; Stephen W Coons; Dennis Bullard; David Brachman; Jan C Buckner; Keith J Stelzer; Geoffrey R Barger; Paul D Brown; Mark R Gilbert; Minesh Mehta Journal: J Neurosurg Date: 2008-11 Impact factor: 5.115
Authors: Philippe Schucht; Michael Murek; Astrid Jilch; Kathleen Seidel; Ekkehard Hewer; Roland Wiest; Andreas Raabe; Jürgen Beck Journal: PLoS One Date: 2013-11-13 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Roland Roelz; David Strohmaier; Ramazan Jabbarli; Rainer Kraeutle; Karl Egger; Volker A Coenen; Astrid Weyerbrock; Peter C Reinacher Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2016-08-30 Impact factor: 4.379