| Literature DB >> 31897177 |
Hongliang Zhang1, Yugong Feng1, Lei Cheng1, Jie Liu1, Huanting Li1, Hong Jiang2.
Abstract
The present study aimed to explore the application of diffusion tensor tractography (DTT) in the preoperative planning and prognostic evaluation of tumors located in the functional areas of the brain. A total of 42 patients diagnosed with intracranial tumors were randomly assigned to either the trial or the control group. DT imaging (DTI) was performed on the basis of preoperative conventional magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and analyzed for patients in the trial group. Patients in the control group underwent only routine MRI scans. The effect of DTT on the prognosis of patients was evaluated by tumor resection rate and quality of life evaluation using Karnofsky performance score (KPS) comparison between the trial and control groups. There were no significant differences for total tumor removal rate in the trial group (85.71%) compared with that in the control group (71.43%) (P>0.05). The rate of postoperative symptom improvement in the trial group (85.71%) was significantly higher compared with that in the control group (47.62%) (P<0.05). The KPS value of the trial group was significantly higher postoperatively (78.57±17.40) compared with that preoperatively (66.67±16.23) (P<0.05). The KPS value of the control group postoperatively (72.38±19.21) was significantly higher compared with that preoperatively (66.67±16.00) (P<0.05). The postoperative KPS improvement rate [postoperative value-preoperative value)/preoperative value] of the trial group was significantly higher compared with that in the control group. In conclusion, the use of DTT is an effective supplement to traditional MRI, with particular relevance in preoperative planning, particularly for tumors in the functional area of the brain, and can significantly improve the prognostic function of patients. Copyright: © Zhang et al.Entities:
Keywords: diffusion tensor fiber tract imaging; functional brain tumor; preoperative planning; prognostic evaluation
Year: 2019 PMID: 31897177 PMCID: PMC6924117 DOI: 10.3892/ol.2019.11167
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Oncol Lett ISSN: 1792-1074 Impact factor: 2.967
Figure 1.A 61-year-old male patient was admitted to the Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University with progressive speech loss as the main complaint. (A-F) Preoperative DTI data: (A) The GA graph of DTI and (B) the GA color graph. (C) The GA graph reveals the reconstructed arcuate fascicle. (D) The pyramidal fascicle on the left and right side is revealed. (E and F) The vector phase reveals the shape of the arcuate fascicle and the locational association between the cortical end point and the tumor. (G-L) The postoperative review of DTI: (G) The postoperative GA graph. (H) The postoperative GA color graph. 9I) Complete tumor resection. (J-L) The shape of the arcuate fascicle following the removal of the tumor in the axial and sagittal positions. (M-P) The intraoperative situation: (M) The status prior to the opening of the dura mater. (N) The opening of the dura mater and the exposure of the tumor. (O) The careful removal of the tumor; the black arrow reveals that the resection boundary of the tumor was deep into the middle cranial fossa, and the yellow arrows reveals the posterior temporal cut to the edema. (P) The completed tumor resection and the green arc reveals the normal brain tissue boundary. DTI, diffusion tensor tractography; GA, DTI management.
Figure 2.A 44-year-old female suffering from headaches and clumsiness in the right limb was admitted to Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University. (A-D) The preoperative DTI video material. (A) The GA graph. (B) The colored GA graph. (C) The tumor compressing the pyramidal fascicle from the posterior internal side; the red arrow reveals the appropriate surgical approach, while the red arc indicates the safe removal range. (D) The pyramidal fascicle from the coronal display of the tumor side is significantly squeezed to the vicinity of the center line compared with the pyramidal fascicle of the uninjured side. (E-H) The postoperative DTI review data: (E) The GA graph. (F) The colored GA graph. Tumor from the (G) axial and (H) coronal phase. DTI, diffusion tensor tractography; GA, DTI management.
Figure 3.A 51-year-old female suffering from a laborious right foot raise was admitted to the Affiliated Hospital of Qingdoa University. The magnetic resonance imaging revealed lesions on the left side of the brain. Diffusion tensor tractography was performed to reconstruct the peritumoral fiber and indicated that the clear midline 13° angle was the safe surgical approach, with no damage to the peritumoral fiber. Following surgery, the muscle strength of the patient improved with no secondary neurological dysfunction. The red arrow indicates the tumor region.
Postoperative tumor pathological types and the number of cases.
| Pathological types | Trial group, n | Control group, n | χ2 | P-value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Meningioma | 5 | 6 | 2.5 | 0.927 |
| Oligodendroglioma | 6 | 5 | ||
| Astrocytoma | 4 | 5 | ||
| Glioblastoma | 3 | 2 | ||
| Metastatic carcinoma | 1 | 1 | ||
| Cavernous hemangioma | 1 | 2 | ||
| Central neurocytoma | 1 | 0 |
Comparison of the resection rates between the trial and control groups.
| Group name | Number of cases | Subtotal resection, n | Total resection, n | χ2 | P-value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Trial group | 21 | 3 | 18 | 1.273 | 0.259 |
| Control group | 21 | 6 | 15 |
Changes in the postoperative functional impairment symptoms compared with the preoperative symptoms.
| Functional impairment, n/total n | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Group name | Number of cases | Worse | No change | Better | χ2 | P-value |
| Trial group | 21 | 1/21 | 2/21 | 18/21 | 6.952 | 0.031 |
| Control group | 21 | 5/21 | 6/21 | 10/21 | ||
Changes in the KPS values prior to and following surgery between the trial and control groups.
| KPS value | Prior to surgery | Following surgery |
|---|---|---|
| Trial group | 68.59±6.73 | 79.06±7.40[ |
| Control group | 65.84±9.05 | 73.45±6.18[ |
Data is presented as mean ± standard deviation.
P<0.001 vs. prior to surgery in the trial group
P=0.039 vs. following surgery in the control group
P<0.001 vs. prior to surgery in the control group. KPS, Karnofsky performance score.