The CHARTS instrument can be used to reliably and comprehensively map the anatomical location of spontaneous ICH, and may be helpful for studying important questions regarding causes, risk factors, prognosis, and for stratification in clinical trials.
Background and purposeVisual rating scales have limited capacities to depict the regional distribution of cerebral white matter hyperintensities (WMH). We present a regional-zonal volumetric analysis alongside a visualization tool to compare and deconstruct visual rating scales.Materials and methods3D T1-weighted, T2-weighted spin-echo and FLAIR images were acquired on a 3 T system, from 82 elderly participants in a population-based study. Images were automatically segmented for WMH. Lobar boundaries and distance to ventricular surface were used to define white matter regions. Regional-zonal WMH loads were displayed using bullseye plots. Four raters assessed all images applying three scales. Correlations between visual scales and regional WMH as well as inter and intra-rater variability were assessed. A multinomial ordinal regression model was used to predict scores based on regional volumes and global WMH burdens.ResultsOn average, the bullseye plot depicted a right-left symmetry in the distribution and concentration of damage in the periventricular zone, especially in frontal regions. WMH loads correlated well with the average visual rating scores (e.g. Kendall's tau [Volume, Scheltens] = 0.59 CI = [0.53 0.62]). Local correlations allowed comparison of loading patterns between scales and between raters. Regional measurements had more predictive power than global WMH burden (e.g. frontal caps prediction with local features: ICC = 0.67 CI = [0.53 0.77], global volume = 0.50 CI = [0.32 0.65], intra-rater = 0.44 CI = [0.23 0.60]).ConclusionRegional-zonal representation of WMH burden highlights similarities and differences between visual rating scales and raters. The bullseye infographic tool provides a simple visual representation of regional lesion load that can be used for rater calibration and training.
Objectives We examined whether providing a quantitative report (QReport) of regional brain volumes improves radiologists’ accuracy and confidence in detecting volume loss, and in differentiating Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and frontotemporal dementia (FTD), compared with visual assessment alone. Methods Our forced-choice multi-rater clinical accuracy study used MRI from 16 AD patients, 14 FTD patients, and 15 healthy controls; age range 52–81. Our QReport was presented to raters with regional grey matter volumes plotted as percentiles against data from a normative population (n = 461). Nine raters with varying radiological experience (3 each: consultants, registrars, ‘non-clinical image analysts’) assessed each case twice (with and without the QReport). Raters were blinded to clinical and demographic information; they classified scans as ‘normal’ or ‘abnormal’ and if ‘abnormal’ as ‘AD’ or ‘FTD’. Results The QReport improved sensitivity for detecting volume loss and AD across all raters combined (p = 0.015* and p = 0.002*, respectively). Only the consultant group’s accuracy increased significantly when using the QReport (p = 0.02*). Overall, raters’ agreement (Cohen’s κ) with the ‘gold standard’ was not significantly affected by the QReport; only the consultant group improved significantly (κs 0.41➔0.55, p = 0.04*). Cronbach’s alpha for interrater agreement improved from 0.886 to 0.925, corresponding to an improvement from ‘good’ to ‘excellent’. Conclusion Our QReport referencing single-subject results to normative data alongside visual assessment improved sensitivity, accuracy, and interrater agreement for detecting volume loss. The QReport was most effective in the consultants, suggesting that experience is needed to fully benefit from the additional information provided by quantitative analyses. Key Points • The use of quantitative report alongside routine visual MRI assessment improves sensitivity and accuracy for detecting volume loss and AD vs visual assessment alone. • Consultant neuroradiologists’ assessment accuracy and agreement (kappa scores) significantly improved with the use of quantitative atrophy reports. • First multi-rater radiological clinical evaluation of visual quantitative MRI atrophy report for use as a diagnostic aid in dementia.
Spinal ependymomas are rare tumours, with total resection favoured where possible. Several case series assessing the outcome following neurosurgical treatment for spinal ependymoma advocate the usage of adjuvant radiotherapy in cases of subtotal resection, or in unencapsulated tumours. We assessed the outcome of 61 consecutive cases of spinal ependymoma in a single centre over a 20year period using a variety of outcome measures. Sex distribution was equal, with a mean age at surgery of 43.6years (range 5-76years). Overall, most tumours occurred in the lumbosacral region (70.5%), with fewer in the thoracic (27.9%) and cervical regions (18.0%). Myxopapillary features were seen in 41.0% of tumours, and were more common when occurring in the lumbar region (51.2%). Gross total resection was achieved in 52.5%, subtotal resection in 37.7% and biopsy alone in 9.8% of patients and 31.1% received adjuvant radiotherapy. Two-thirds of patients achieved an excellent post-operative neurological outcome (Frankel grade E). Tumour recurrence was rare. Gross total resection and good preoperative neurological condition were most strongly predictive of good outcome. Post-operative radiotherapy did not seem to confer survival benefit in this case series, even in cases of incomplete resection, leading us to question its utility for all cases of spinal cord ependymoma.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.