| Literature DB >> 31904008 |
Xiao-Yong Chen1, Chen-Yu Ding1, Hong-Hai You1, Jin-Yuan Chen2, Chang-Zhen Jiang1, Xiao-Rong Yan1, Zhang-Ya Lin1, De-Zhi Kang1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND Controversies exist in imaging modalities for predicting adenoma consistency. In this study, we proposed a method of predicting consistency by magnetic resonance T2-sequence imaging based on adenoma to cerebellar peduncle signal (TCTI) ratio. MATERIAL AND METHODS Between January 2013 and May 2017, 191 consecutive patients with pituitary adenoma diagnosed at our institution were retrospectively studied. The consistency grade for each lesion was assigned. And the TCTI ratio based on preoperative and postoperative T2-weighted imaging was calculated. RESULTS The median TCTI ratio was 1.55, 1.28, and 1.25 for soft, fibrous, and hard adenomas, respectively. The differences were significant for all groups (p<0.001). A cutoff value of 1.38 for soft adenomas was found to be 80.2% sensitive and 88.7% specific. The median ratio of the outermost layer of residual tumor was 1.25 (SD±0.408, 95% CI 1.27-1.42). It was less than that ratio of the upper, lower quarter, and middle region of adenoma, respectively, and the inter-group differences were all statistically significant with p≤0.001. The extent of resection for the soft group was significantly greater than that of the hard group (85.3% vs. 70.6%, p=0.011). Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) revealed that the consistency grade was the influencing factor of degree of resection. p=0.003. CONCLUSIONS The TCTI ratio showed a good correlation with pituitary adenoma consistency. We also determined the optimal ratio of the residual adenoma.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 31904008 PMCID: PMC6977630 DOI: 10.12659/MSM.919565
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Med Sci Monit ISSN: 1234-1010
Figure 1Schematic diagrams for 2 cases in different residual forms. (A) ROI in the cerebellar peduncle was drawn on axial T2-weighted image. (B) The solid line represents the maximum length of tumor. Three points divided the solid line into 4 equal parts. Based on the points, tumor ROIs in 3 regions were selected on coronal T2-weighted image. (C, D) Case 1 shows the residual tumor mainly in the upper part. A dotted line was made connecting the central points of the cavernous segment of internal carotid artery on both sides. The white dot was the midpoint of the curve which represented incisal margin (white arrow). The distance between the incisal margin and the opposite margin based on white dot perpendicular to the dotted line was drawn and named L2. The length from the intersection of 2 lines to the central point of right internal carotid artery was drawn and named L1. According to line L1’ and line L2’, which was equal to line L1 and line L2, the point we found on preoperative MR was equal to that which was drawn on postoperative MR both in length and location (white arrow). ROI for the residual point was selected on the preoperative T2-weighted image. (E, F) Case 2 shows the residual tumor mainly in the invasive part of cavernous sinus segment of internal carotid artery. A dotted line was made connecting the central points of the 2 segments of internal carotid artery on the right side. The white dot was the midpoint of the curve which represented incisal margin (white arrow). The diameter of the residual adenoma based on white dot perpendicular to the dotted line was drawn and named L2. The length from the intersection of 2 lines to the central point of right internal carotid artery was drawn and named L1. According to line L1’ and line L2’, which was equal to line L1 and line L2, the point we found on preoperative MR was equal to that which was drawn on postoperative MR both in length and location (white arrow). The ROI for the residual point was selected on the preoperative T2-weighted image.
Summary of characteristics of 191 patients.
| Characteristic | Value | Soft | Fibrous | Hard | p |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean age±SD, years | 47.9±14 | 47.5±14 | 49.8±14 | 47.2±14 | 0.641 |
| Sex | 0.772 | ||||
| Male | 91 (47.6%) | 59 (53.2%) | 19 (47.5%) | 22 (55%) | |
| Female | 100 (52.4%) | 52 (46.8%) | 21 (52.5%) | 18 (45%) | |
| Size | 0.255 | ||||
| Micro ≤1 cm | 4 (2.1%) | 2 (1.8%) | 0 (0.0%) | 2 (5.0%) | |
| Large 1–4 cm | 163 (85.3%) | 91 (82.0%) | 37 (92.5%) | 35 (87.5%) | |
| Giant >4 cm | 24 (12.6%) | 18 (16.2%) | 3 (7.5%) | 3 (7.5%) | |
| Knosp grade | 0.369 | ||||
| 0 | 11 (5.8%) | 5 (4.5%) | 4 (10.0%) | 2 (5.0%) | |
| 1 | 38 (19.9%) | 22 (19.8%) | 9 (22.5%) | 7 (17.5%) | |
| 2 | 44 (23.0%) | 21 (18.9%) | 9 (22.5%) | 14 (35.0%) | |
| 3 | 33 (17.3%) | 18 (16.2%) | 8 (20.0%) | 7 (17.5%) | |
| 4 | 65 (34.0%) | 45 (40.5%) | 10 (25.0%) | 10 (25.0%) | |
| Preoperative hematological parameters | |||||
| ACTH 8am pg/mL | 37.96±32.23 | 36.90±34.78 | 38.39±27.56 | 40.70±29.51 | 0.858 |
| ACTH 4pm pg/mL | 22.03±22.13 | 20.95±17.43 | 26.13±30.25 | 20.63±24.31 | 0.497 |
| PRL mIU/L | 416.90 (204.60–830.00) | 385.80 (197.10–803.00) | 497.70 (296.35–967.65) | 328.30 (204.50–844.00) | 0.387 |
| GH ug/L | 92.37±1058 | 147.71±1378 | 7.41±17.09 | 18.35±52.12 | 0.721 |
| TSH mIU/L | 2.34±3.90 | 2.03±2.71 | 3.39±6.92 | 2.21±2.31 | 0.198 |
| FSH IU/L | 15.64±26.87 | 16.56±30.65 | 12.81±16.43 | 15.96±24.24 | 0.768 |
| LH IU/L | 5.26±7.66 | 5.52±8.94 | 4.76±5.72 | 5.01±5.1 | 0.857 |
| Main complain | |||||
| Excessive hormone secretion | 25 (13.2%) | 13 (11.8%) | 6 (15.0%) | 6 (15.0%) | |
| Insufficient hormone secretion | 26 (13.7%) | 15 (13.6%) | 4 (10.0%) | 7 (17.5%) | |
| Compression of surrounding structure | 118 (62.1%) | 75 (68.2%) | 22 (55.0%) | 21 (52.5%) | |
| Tumor stroke | 5 (2.6%) | 1 (0.9%) | 2 (5.0%) | 2 (5.0%) | |
| Absence of symptoms | 16 (8.4%) | 6 (5.5%) | 6 (15.0%) | 4 (10.0%) | |
| Hematological index after surgery (Day 1) | |||||
| ACTH 8 am pg/mL | 41.33±77.64 | 35.72±52.61 | 62.02±131.05 | 28.00±18.93 | 0.329 |
| ACTH 4 pm pg/mL | 59.86±101.11 | 75.71±114.78 | 55.38±77.99 | 68.09±57.28 | 0.739 |
| PRL mIU/L | 207.80 (91.90–524.80) | 191.15 (78.09–531.08) | 312.85 (187.65–570.50) | 181.40 (45.94–305.40) | 0.604 |
| GH ug/L | 5.95±10.89 | 5.74±11.26 | 6.54±12.08 | 5.96±8.08 | 0.962 |
| TSH mIU/L | 5.39±40.63 | 7.94±52.17 | 1.83±3.42 | 1.02±1.00 | 0.702 |
| FSH IU/L | 10.40±11.98 | 10.37±12.98 | 9.78±9.75 | 11.66±11.87 | 0.896 |
| LH IU/L | 4.84±6.32 | 4.37±6.15 | 4.60±5.79 | 7.50±7.87 | 0.263 |
| Immunohistochemical subtypes | 0.001* | ||||
| ACTH positive | 6 (3.1%) | 5 (4.5%) | 1 (2.5%) | 0 (0.0%) | |
| FSH positive | 30 (15.7%) | 8 (7.2%) | 14 (35.0%) | 8 (20.0%) | |
| GH positive | 4 (2.1%) | 3 (2.7%) | 0 (0.0%) | 1 (2.5%) | |
| LH positive | 1 (0.5%) | 1 (0.9%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | |
| PRL positive | 18 (9.4%) | 11 (9.9%) | 5 (12.5%) | 2 (5.0%) | |
| TSH positive | 1 (0.5%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 1 (2.5%) | |
| Multiple items positive | 17 (8.9%) | 9 (8.1%) | 4 (10.0%) | 4 (10.0%) | |
| Negative | 110 (57.6%) | 71 (64.0%) | 15 (37.5%) | 24 (60.0%) | |
| Residual adenoma invading cavernous sinus | 0.912 | ||||
| No | 104 (61.5%) | 60 (60.6%) | 22 (61.1%) | 22 (64.7%) | |
| Yes | 65 (38.5%) | 39 (39.4%) | 14 (38.9%) | 12 (35.3%) | |
| Complication | 0.333 | ||||
| No | 174 (91.1%) | 103 (92.8%) | 34 (85.0%) | 37 (92.5%) | |
| Yes | 17 (8.9%) | 8 (7.2%) | 6 (15.0%) | 3 (7.5%) | |
Figure 2Frequency distribution for TCTI ratio by consistency.
Pituitary adenoma consistency groups statistics.
| Category | Overall TCTI Ratio | Pituitary adenoma Consistency Grade | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Soft | Fibrous | Hard | ||
| Mean | 1.46 | 1.64 | 1.25 | 1.21 |
| Median | 1.39 | 1.55 | 1.28 | 1.23 |
| Minimum | 0.60 | 0.83 | 1.00 | 0.60 |
| Maximum | 3.01 | 3.01 | 1.60 | 2.2 |
| SD | 0.40 | 0.13 | 0.26 | |
| 95% CI | 1.56–1.71 | 1.21–1.29 | 1.23–1.29 | |