Firuze OCAK, Mehmet Erdem YILDIZ, Alp DİNÇER

İNFİLTRATİF GLİAL TÜMÖR EVRELEMESİNDE SUSCEPTİBİLİTY AĞIRLIKLI GÖRÜNTÜLEME

Amaç: Tümör tipleri ve evrelendirme için histopatolojik ve radyolojik inceleme gereklidir. Histopatolojik inceleme altın standart olarak kabul edilirken, preoperatif değerlendirme için radyolojik inceleme kullanılır. Bu çalışmanın amacı infiltratif glial tümörlerin evrelemesinde susceptibility ağırlıklı görüntülemenin SWI değerlendirilmesidir. Materyal ve Metot: Patolojik olarak glial tümör tanısı konmuş 67 hastanın 4–79 yaş, yaş ortalaması 36,7; 29 kadın ve 38 erkek retrospektif olarak preoperatif MRG görüntülemelerindeki SWI sekansları değerlendirilmiştir. Tüm tümörlerin SWI sekansında izlenen punktat ITSS intratumoral susceptibility sign sayıları iki radyolog tarafından konsensusla patolojik tanıları bilinmeden kör olarak hesaplanmıştır. Hiç ITSS içermeyen lezyonlar ITSS Evre 0, 1–5 ITSS içeren lezyonlar ITSS Evre 1, 6–15 ITSS içeren lezyonlar ITSS Evre 2, 15

Susceptibility-Weighted Imaging In Grading of Infiltrative Glial Tumors

Purpose: Histopathological and radiological examination is necessary for the evaluation of tumor types and staging. Histopathologic examination is considered as the gold standard, while the radiological examination is used for preoperative evaluation. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate susceptibility-weighted imaging SWI the in grading of infiltrative glial tumors.Materials and Methods: The SWI sequences in pre-operative magnetic resonance imaging MRI images were retrospectively assessed in a total of 67 patients mean age, 36.7 years; age range, 4–79 years; 29 female, 38 male who were diagnosed with a glial tumor based on histopathological examination. The numbers of punctate intratumoral susceptibility sign ITSS in the SWI sequence in the tumors were determined by two radiologists on a consensus-based approach. Lesions with no ITSS were graded as Grade 0, while those having 1–5, 6–15, >15 ITSS were categorized as Grade 1, Grade 2, and Grade 3, respectively. No susceptibility was classified as ITSS, “non-punctate with blurred margins” and diffuse susceptibility were categorized as >15. ITSS grades were compared to the results of histopathological grading and diagnosis.Results: The sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value, and positive predictive value of the presence of ITSS regarding differentiating high and low-grade glial tumors were 97.6%, 88%, 95.65%, and 93.18%, respectively.Conclusion: In diffuse glial tumors, while the presence of ITSS is indicative of high-grade tumors, its absence is associated with low-grade tumors. These data suggest that the presence rather than the number of ITSS yields more information on the grade of this type of tumor

Keywords:

Glial tumor, susceptibility-weighted imaging SWI,

PDF

___

Ricard D, Idbaih A, Ducray F, Lahutte M, Hoang-Xuan K, Delattre J-Y. Primary brain tumours in adults. The Lancet 2012;379:1984–96. [CrossRef]

Kao H-W, Chiang S-W, Chung H-W, Tsai FY, Chen C-Y. Advanced MR imaging of gliomas: an update. BioMed Res Int 2013;2013. [CrossRef]

Young GS. Advanced MRI of adult brain tumors. Neurol Clin 2007;25:947–73. [CrossRef]

Gasparotti R, Pinelli L, Liserre R. New MR sequences in daily practice: susceptibility weighted imaging. A pictorial essay. Insights Imaging 2011;2:335–47. [CrossRef]

Black PM, Moriarty T, Alexander E, Stieg P, Woodard EJ, Gleason PL, et al. Development and implementation of intraoperative magnetic resonance imaging and its neurosurgical applications. Neurosurgery 1997;41:831–45. [CrossRef]

Atlas SW. Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Brain and Spine, 4th ed USA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2009.

Haacke EM, Mittal S, Wu Z, Neelavalli J, Cheng Y-CN. Susceptibility- weighted imaging: technical aspects and clinical applications, part 1. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2009;30:19–30. [CrossRef]

Tong K, Ashwal S, Obenaus A, Nickerson J, Kido D, Haacke E. Susceptibility-weighted MR imaging: a review of clinical applications in children. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2008;29:9–17. [CrossRef]

Mittal S, Wu Z, Neelavalli J, Haacke EM. Susceptibility-weighted imaging: technical aspects and clinical applications, part 2. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2009;30:232–52. [CrossRef]

Kim H, Jahng G-H, Ryu C, Kim S. Added value and diagnostic performance of intratumoral susceptibility signals in the differential diagnosis of solitary enhancing brain lesions: preliminary study. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2009;30:1574–9. [CrossRef]

Louis DN, Perry A, Reifenberger G, von Deimling A, Branger DF, Cavenee WK, et al. The 2016 World Health Organization classification of tumors of the central nervous system: a summary. Acta Neuropathol 2016;131:803–20. [CrossRef]

Sehgal V, Delproposto Z, Haacke EM, Tong KA, Wycliffe N, Kido DK, et al. Clinical applications of neuroimaging with susceptibility‐ weighted imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging 2005;22:439–50. [CrossRef]

Liu S, Buch S, Chen Y, Choi HS, Dai Y, Habib C, et al. Susceptibility‐ weighted imaging: current status and future directions. NMR Biomed 2017;30:e3552. [CrossRef]

Sehgal V, Delproposto Z, Haddar D, Haacke EM, Sloan AE, Zamorano LJ, et al. Susceptibility‐weighted imaging to visualize blood products and improve tumor contrast in the study of brain masses. J Magn Reson Imaging 2006;24:41–51. [CrossRef]

Verclytte S, Fisch O, Colas L, Vanaerde O, Toledano M, Budzik J-F. ASL and susceptibility-weighted imaging contribution to the management of acute ischaemic stroke. Insights Imaging 2017;8:91– 100. [CrossRef]

Hermier M, Nighoghossian N. Contribution of susceptibility- weighted imaging to acute stroke assessment. Stroke 2004;35:1989– 94. [CrossRef]

Löbel U, Sedlacik J, Sabin ND, Kocak M, Broniscer A, Hillenbrand CM, Patay Z. Three-dimensional susceptibility-weighted imaging and two-dimensional T2*-weighted gradient-echo imaging of intratumoral hemorrhages in pediatric diffuse intrinsic pontine glioma. Neuroradiology 2010;52:1167–77. [CrossRef]

Park S, Kim H, Jahng G, Ryu C, Kim S. Combination of high-resolution susceptibility-weighted imaging and the apparent diffusion coefficient: added value to brain tumour imaging and clinical feasibility of non-contrast MRI at 3 T. Br J Radiol 2010;83:466–75. [CrossRef]

Brendle C, Hempel J-M, Schittenhelm J, Skardelly M, Reischl G, Bender B, et al. Glioma grading by dynamic susceptibility contrast perfusion and 11 C-methionine positron emission tomography using different regions of interest. Neuroradiology 2018;60:381–9. [CrossRef]

Pinker K, Noebauer-Huhmann IM, Stavrou I, Hoeftberger R, Szomolanyi P, Karanikas G, et al. High-resolution contrast-enhanced, susceptibility-weighted MR imaging at 3T in patients with brain tumors: correlation with positron-emission tomography and histopathologic findings. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2007;28:1280–6. [CrossRef]

Park M, Kim H, Jahng G-H, Ryu C-W, Park S, Kim S. Semiquantitative assessment of intratumoral susceptibility signals using non-contrast- enhanced high-field high-resolution susceptibility-weighted imaging in patients with gliomas: comparison with MR perfusion imaging. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2009;30:1402–8. [CrossRef]

Balaji R. Diagnostic accuracy of whole-body diffusion imaging with background signal suppression (DWIBS) for detection of malignant tumours: a comparison with PET/CT. European Congress of Radiology 2012. Poster no: C-1422. [CrossRef]

Mohammed W, Xunning H, Haibin S, Jingzhi M. Clinical applications of susceptibility-weighted imaging in detecting and grading intracranial gliomas: a review. Cancer Imaging 2013;13:186–95. [CrossRef]

Li C, Ai B, Li Y, Qi H, Wu L. Susceptibility-weighted imaging in grading brain astrocytomas. Eur J Radiol 2010;75:e81–5. [CrossRef]

Peters S, Knöß N, Wodarg F, Cnyrim C, Jansen O. Glioblastomas vs. lymphomas: more diagnostic certainty by using susceptibility- weighted imaging (SWI). Fortschr Röntgenstr 2012;184:713–8. [CrossRef]

Lupo JM, Banerjee S, Hammond KE, Kelley DAC, Xu D, Chang SM, et al. GRAPPA-based susceptibility-weighted imaging of normal volunteers and patients with brain tumor at 7 T. Magn Reson Imaging 2009;27:480–8. [CrossRef]