Suppr超能文献

估计脑膜瘤体积的简单方法:基于ABC法和SH法的方法能否在临床实践中可靠应用?

Simple Ways to Estimate Meningioma Volume: Can ABC- and SH-Derived Methods Be Used in Clinical Practice Reliably?

作者信息

Xiao Dongdong, Liu Jun, Hu Tingting, Shah Nayaz Burkutally Mohammad, Jiang Xiaobing, Zhang Fangcheng, Yan Pengfei

机构信息

Department of Neurosurgery, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430022, China.

Department of Neurosurgery, Taihe Hospital, Hubei University of Medicine, Shiyan 442000, China.

出版信息

J Oncol. 2021 Aug 23;2021:9712287. doi: 10.1155/2021/9712287. eCollection 2021.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

There is a clinical demand for rapid estimation of meningioma volumes. Our objective was to assess the accuracy of three ABC-derived and three SH-derived formula methods on volume estimation of meningiomas.

METHODS

The study group comprised 678 patients treated at our department for histopathologically proven intracranial meningiomas. For each patient, tumor volumes were independently measured using six formula methods as well as planimetry. Maximum tumor diameter and ellipsoidity were also recorded. Volumes were compared using descriptive statistics, correlation analysis, and consistency analysis.

RESULTS

Among all methods assessed, 2/3SH and 1/2ABC outperformed the others. No significant differences were found between volumes obtained by the two methods and those of planimetry ( > 0.05). Spearman rank-correlation coefficients ( ) were 0.99 for both methods ( < 0.01), and ICC were 0.99 and 0.98, respectively. In Bland-Altman plot, most data points lay inside the limit of agreement. Overall, 2/3SH overestimated tumor volumes by 1.29%, and estimation errors in 93.66% cases were within 20%; 1/2ABC overestimated tumor volumes by 5.36%, and estimation errors in 93.51% cases were within 30%. The performance of 2/3SH and 1/2ABC in small-volume meningiomas was slightly worse, especially for 1/2ABC. Correlations between ellipsoidity and percentage errors of 2/3SH and 1/2ABC were weak (  = -0.06 and -0.24, respectively). Despite a significant correlation between maximum tumor diameter and planimetric volume (  = -0.96), volumes could vary significantly for a given diameter.

CONCLUSIONS

Formula methods 2/3SH and 1/2ABC can estimate meningioma volumes with decent accuracy. Compared with the 1/2ABC method, the 2/3SH method showed slightly better performance, especially in small-volume meningiomas. Ellipsoidity is not a suitable parameter to predict estimation error, and maximum tumor diameter is not a reliable surrogate for actual meningioma volume.

摘要

背景

临床上对快速估计脑膜瘤体积有需求。我们的目的是评估三种基于ABC的公式方法和三种基于SH的公式方法在脑膜瘤体积估计方面的准确性。

方法

研究组包括在我们科室接受治疗的678例经组织病理学证实的颅内脑膜瘤患者。对于每位患者,使用六种公式方法以及面积测量法独立测量肿瘤体积。还记录了肿瘤最大直径和椭圆率。使用描述性统计、相关性分析和一致性分析对体积进行比较。

结果

在所有评估方法中,2/3SH和1/2ABC表现优于其他方法。这两种方法获得的体积与面积测量法获得的体积之间未发现显著差异(>0.05)。两种方法的Spearman等级相关系数()均为0.99(<0.01),组内相关系数分别为0.99和0.98。在Bland-Altman图中,大多数数据点位于一致性界限内。总体而言,2/3SH高估肿瘤体积1.29%,93.66%的病例估计误差在20%以内;1/2ABC高估肿瘤体积5.36%,93.51%的病例估计误差在30%以内。2/3SH和1/2ABC在小体积脑膜瘤中的表现略差,尤其是1/2ABC。2/3SH和1/2ABC的椭圆率与百分比误差之间的相关性较弱(分别为=-0.06和-0.24)。尽管肿瘤最大直径与面积测量体积之间存在显著相关性(=-0.96),但对于给定直径,体积可能会有显著差异。

结论

公式方法2/3SH和1/2ABC可以较为准确地估计脑膜瘤体积。与1/2ABC方法相比,2/3SH方法表现略优,尤其是在小体积脑膜瘤中。椭圆率不是预测估计误差的合适参数,肿瘤最大直径也不是实际脑膜瘤体积的可靠替代指标。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/fe94/8407974/a312e41c61c6/JO2021-9712287.001.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验