Download PDF
J Neurol Surg B Skull Base 2018; 79(05): 475-481
DOI: 10.1055/s-0037-1618577
Original Article
Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Three-Dimensional Volumetric Segmentation of Pituitary Tumors: Assessment of Inter-rater Agreement and Comparison with Conventional Geometric Equations

Karl Lindberg
1   Department of Neurosurgery, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenburg, Sweden
2   Department of Neuroradiology, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenburg, Sweden
,
Angelica Kouti
2   Department of Neuroradiology, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenburg, Sweden
,
Doerthe Ziegelitz
2   Department of Neuroradiology, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenburg, Sweden
,
Tobias Hallén
1   Department of Neurosurgery, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenburg, Sweden
,
Thomas Skoglund
1   Department of Neurosurgery, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenburg, Sweden
3   Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Institute of Neuroscience and Physiology, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden
,
Dan Farahmand
1   Department of Neurosurgery, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenburg, Sweden
3   Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Institute of Neuroscience and Physiology, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden
› Author Affiliations Funding None.
Further Information

Publication History

22 August 2017

01 December 2017

Publication Date:
19 January 2018 (online)

    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Background The assessment of pituitary tumor (PT) volume is important in the treatment and follow-up of patients with PT. Previously, PT volume estimation has been performed by conventional geometric equations (CGE) such as abc/2 (simplified ellipsoid volume equation) and 4πr3/3 (sphere), both presuming a symmetric tumor shape, which occurs uncommonly in patients with PT. In contrast, three-dimensional (3D) voxel-based software segmentation takes the irregular and asymmetric shapes that PTs often possess into account and might be a more accurate method for PT volume segmentation.

The purpose of this study is twofold. (1) To compare 3D segmentation with CGE for PT volume estimation. (2) To assess inter-rater reliability in 3D segmentation of PTs.

Methods Nineteen high-resolution (1mm slice thickness) T1-weighted MRI examinations of patients with PT were independently analyzed and manually segmented, using the software ITK-SNAP, by two certified neuroradiologists. Concurrently, the volumes of the PTs were estimated with abc/2 and 4πr3/3 by a clinician, and the results were compared with the corresponding segmented volumes.

Results There was a significant decrease in PT volume attained from the segmentations compared with the calculations made with abc/2 (p < 0.001, mean volume 18% higher than segmentation) and 4πr3/3 (p < 0.001, mean volume 28% higher than segmentation). The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) for the two sets of segmented PTs was 0.99.

Conclusion CGE (abc/2 and 4πr3/3) significantly overestimates PT volume compared with 3D volumetric segmentation. The inter-rater agreement on manual 3D volumetric software segmentation is excellent.

Keywords

pituitary tumor volume - volumetric analysis - segmentation - abc/2

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.


The study was approved by the Regional Ethical Review Board in Gothenburg (No. 2015:100–15).


Informed Consent

Formal consent for this type of study is not required.


 

  • References

  • 1 Ostrom QT, Gittleman H, Farah P. , et al. CBTRUS statistical report: Primary brain and central nervous system tumors diagnosed in the United States in 2006-2010. Neuro-oncol 2013; 15 (Suppl. 02) ii1-ii56
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Johannesen TB, Angell-Andersen E, Tretli S, Langmark F, Lote K. Trends in incidence of brain and central nervous system tumors in Norway, 1970-1999. Neuroepidemiology 2004; 23 (03) 101-109
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Materljan E, Materljan B, Sepcić J, Tuskan-Mohar L, Zamolo G, Erman-Baldini I. Epidemiology of central nervous system tumors in Labin area, Croatia, 1974-2001. Croat Med J 2004; 45 (02) 206-212
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Hardy J. Transsphenoidal surgery of hypersecreting pituitary tumors. In: Kohler PO, Ross GT. , eds. Diagnosis and Treatment of Pituitary Tumors. New York, NY: Elsevier; 1973: 179-194
    Google Scholar
  • 5 Di Ieva A, Rotondo F, Syro LV, Cusimano MD, Kovacs K. Aggressive pituitary adenomas--diagnosis and emerging treatments. Nat Rev Endocrinol 2014; 10 (07) 423-435
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Knosp E, Steiner E, Kitz K, Matula C. Pituitary adenomas with invasion of the cavernous sinus space: a magnetic resonance imaging classification compared with surgical findings. Neurosurgery 1993; 33 (04) 610-617 ; discussion 617–618
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Mortini P, Losa M, Barzaghi R, Boari N, Giovanelli M. Results of transsphenoidal surgery in a large series of patients with pituitary adenoma. Neurosurgery 2005; 56 (06) 1222-1233 ; discussion 1233
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Milker-Zabel S, Debus J, Thilmann C, Schlegel W, Wannenmacher M. Fractionated stereotactically guided radiotherapy and radiosurgery in the treatment of functional and nonfunctional adenomas of the pituitary gland. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2001; 50 (05) 1279-1286
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Schwyzer L, Starke RM, Jane Jr JA, Oldfield EH. Percent reduction of growth hormone levels correlates closely with percent resected tumor volume in acromegaly. J Neurosurg 2015; 122 (04) 798-802
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Heaney AP, Fernando M, Yong WH, Melmed S. Functional PPAR-γ receptor is a novel therapeutic target for ACTH-secreting pituitary adenomas. Nat Med 2002; 8 (11) 1281-1287
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Chohan MO, Levin AM, Singh R. , et al. Three-dimensional volumetric measurements in defining endoscope-guided giant adenoma surgery outcomes. Pituitary 2016; 19 (03) 311-321
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Wang CW, Juan CJ, Liu YJ. , et al. Volume-dependent overestimation of spontaneous intracerebral hematoma volume by the ABC/2 formula. Acta Radiol 2009; 50 (03) 306-311
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Pekarek LA, Starr BA, Toledano AY, Schreiber H. Inhibition of tumor growth by elimination of granulocytes. J Exp Med 1995; 181 (01) 435-440
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Lee Y, Auh SL, Wang Y. , et al. Therapeutic effects of ablative radiation on local tumor require CD8+ T cells: changing strategies for cancer treatment. Blood 2009; 114 (03) 589-595
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Flaherty ML, Tao H, Haverbusch M. , et al. Warfarin use leads to larger intracerebral hematomas. Neurology 2008; 71 (14) 1084-1089
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Paluzzi A, Fernandez-Miranda JC, Tonya Stefko S, Challinor S, Snyderman CH, Gardner PA. Endoscopic endonasal approach for pituitary adenomas: a series of 555 patients. Pituitary 2014; 17 (04) 307-319
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Karppinen A, Kivipelto L, Vehkavaara S. , et al. Transition From Microscopic to Endoscopic Transsphenoidal Surgery for Nonfunctional Pituitary Adenomas. World Neurosurg 2015; 84 (01) 48-57
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Kothari RU, Brott T, Broderick JP. , et al. The ABCs of measuring intracerebral hemorrhage volumes. Stroke 1996; 27 (08) 1304-1305
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Nobels FR, de Herder WW, van den Brink WM. , et al. Long-term treatment with the dopamine agonist quinagolide of patients with clinically non-functioning pituitary adenoma. Eur J Endocrinol 2000; 143 (05) 615-621
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Yushkevich PA, Piven J, Hazlett HC. , et al. User-guided 3D active contour segmentation of anatomical structures: significantly improved efficiency and reliability. Neuroimage 2006; 31 (03) 1116-1128
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Fedorov A, Beichel R, Kalpathy-Cramer J. , et al. 3D Slicer as an image computing platform for the Quantitative Imaging Network. Magn Reson Imaging 2012; 30 (09) 1323-1341
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Reuter M, Schmansky NJ, Rosas HD, Fischl B. Within-subject template estimation for unbiased longitudinal image analysis. Neuroimage 2012; 61 (04) 1402-1418
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Rosset A, Spadola L, Ratib O. OsiriX: an open-source software for navigating in multidimensional DICOM images. J Digit Imaging 2004; 17 (03) 205-216
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Gebel JM, Sila CA, Sloan MA. , et al. Comparison of the ABC/2 estimation technique to computer-assisted volumetric analysis of intraparenchymal and subdural hematomas complicating the GUSTO-1 trial. Stroke 1998; 29 (09) 1799-1801
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Huttner HB, Steiner T, Hartmann M. , et al. Comparison of ABC/2 estimation technique to computer-assisted planimetric analysis in warfarin-related intracerebral parenchymal hemorrhage. Stroke 2006; 37 (02) 404-408
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Yu YL, Lee MS, Juan CJ, Hueng DY. Calculating the tumor volume of acoustic neuromas: comparison of ABC/2 formula with planimetry method. Clin Neurol Neurosurg 2013; 115 (08) 1371-1374
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Sreenivasan SA, Madhugiri VS, Sasidharan GM, Kumar RV. Measuring glioma volumes: A comparison of linear measurement based formulae with the manual image segmentation technique. J Cancer Res Ther 2016; 12 (01) 161-168
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Davies BM, Carr E, Soh C, Gnanalingham KK. Assessing size of pituitary adenomas: a comparison of qualitative and quantitative methods on MR. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 2016; 158 (04) 677-683
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Zhang H, Schneider T, Wheeler-Kingshott CA, Alexander DC. NODDI: practical in vivo neurite orientation dispersion and density imaging of the human brain. Neuroimage 2012; 61 (04) 1000-1016
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Mosconi MW, Cody-Hazlett H, Poe MD, Gerig G, Gimpel-Smith R, Piven J. Longitudinal study of amygdala volume and joint attention in 2- to 4-year-old children with autism. Arch Gen Psychiatry 2009; 66 (05) 509-516
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Shi F, Fan Y, Tang S, Gilmore JH, Lin W, Shen D. Neonatal brain image segmentation in longitudinal MRI studies. Neuroimage 2010; 49 (01) 391-400
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Yushkevich PA, Avants BB, Pluta J. , et al. A high-resolution computational atlas of the human hippocampus from postmortem magnetic resonance imaging at 9.4 T. Neuroimage 2009; 44 (02) 385-398
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 John JP, Wang L, Moffitt AJ, Singh HK, Gado MH, Csernansky JG. Inter-rater reliability of manual segmentation of the superior, inferior and middle frontal gyri. Psychiatry Res 2006; 148 (2–3): 151-163
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Luft AR, Skalej M, Welte D, Kolb R, Klose U. Reliability and exactness of MRI-based volumetry: a phantom study. J Magn Reson Imaging 1996; 6 (04) 700-704
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Boers AM, Zijlstra IA, Gathier CS. , et al. Automatic quantification of subarachnoid hemorrhage on noncontrast CT. Am J Neuroradiol 2014; 35 (12) 2279-2286
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Gaonkar B, Macyszyn L, Bilello M. , et al. Automated tumor volumetry using computer-aided image segmentation. Acad Radiol 2015; 22 (05) 653-661
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Ambarki K, Lindqvist T, Wåhlin A. , et al. Evaluation of automatic measurement of the intracranial volume based on quantitative MR imaging. Am J Neuroradiol 2012; 33 (10) 1951-1956
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Qiu W, Yuan J, Rajchl M. , et al. 3D MR ventricle segmentation in pre-term infants with post-hemorrhagic ventricle dilatation (PHVD) using multi-phase geodesic level-sets. Neuroimage 2015; 118: 13-25
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar