Reproducibility of volume analysis of dynamic susceptibility contrast perfusion–weighted imaging in untreated glioblastomas

Purpose Despite a high variability, the hotspot method is widely used to calculate the cerebral blood volume (CBV) of glioblastomas on DSC-MRI. Our aim was to investigate inter- and intra-observer reproducibility of parameters calculated with the hotspot or a volume method and that of an original pa...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Neuroradiology 2022-09, Vol.64 (9), p.1763-1771
Hauptverfasser: Roques, Margaux, Raveneau, Magali, Adam, Gilles, De Barros, Amaury, Catalaa, Isabelle, Patsoura, Sofia, Cognard, Christophe, Darcourt, Jean, Bonneville, Fabrice
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Purpose Despite a high variability, the hotspot method is widely used to calculate the cerebral blood volume (CBV) of glioblastomas on DSC-MRI. Our aim was to investigate inter- and intra-observer reproducibility of parameters calculated with the hotspot or a volume method and that of an original parameter assessing the fraction of pixels in the tumour volume displaying rCBV > 2: %rCBV > 2. Methods Twenty-seven consecutive patients with untreated glioblastoma (age: 63, women: 11) were retrospectively included. Three observers calculated the maximum tumour CBV value (rCBVmax) normalized with a reference ROI in the contralateral white matter (CBVWM) with (i) the hotspot method and (ii) with a volume method following tumour segmentation on 3D contrast–enhanced T1-WI. From this volume method, %rCBV > 2 was also assessed. After 8–12 weeks, one observer repeated all delineations. Intraclass (ICC) and Lin’s (LCC) correlation coefficients were used to determine reproducibility. Results Inter-observer reproducibility of rCBVmax was fair with the hotspot and good with the volume method (ICC = 0.46 vs 0.65, p  > 0.05). For CBVWM, it was fair with the hotspot and excellent with the volume method (0.53 vs 0.84, p   2, that could be promising during the follow-up of such heterogeneous tumours.
ISSN:0028-3940
1432-1920
DOI:10.1007/s00234-022-02937-6