Developmental venous anomaly in adult patients with diffuse glioma

Abstract

ObjectiveTo determine the prevalence of developmental venous anomaly in adult patients with diffuse glioma.MethodsWe performed a retrospective cohort study (2010–2016) of consecutive adult patients harboring a supratentorial diffuse glioma in 2 centers: Sainte-Anne Hospital (experimental and control sets) and Pitié-Salpêtrière Hospital (external validation set). We included 219 patients with diffuse glioma (experimental set), 252 patients with brain metastasis (control set), and 200 patients with diffuse glioma (validation set). The inclusion criteria were age ≥18 years at diagnosis, histopathologic diagnosis of diffuse glioma according to the 2016 World Health Organization classification of tumors of the CNS, surgery as first-line treatment without previous oncologic treatment, available presurgical MRI performed with similar acquisition protocol, and absence of a nodular-like or a ring-like pattern of contrast enhancement on MRI that may preclude the identification of a possible developmental venous anomaly within the glioma.ResultsWe found more developmental venous anomaly in the experimental set (21.5%) than in the control set (5.2%, p < 0.001). Similarly, we found more developmental venous anomaly in the validation set (23.5%) than in the control set (5.2%, p < 0.001). There was no difference in the developmental venous anomaly prevalence between the experimental and validation sets. The developmental venous anomaly distribution was not significantly associated with histopathologic, molecular, or imaging findings of the diffuse gliomas.ConclusionsWe report and replicate in an external cohort a high prevalence of developmental venous anomaly in adult patients with diffuse glioma, which suggests a potential underlying common predisposition or a causal relationship that requires deeper investigations.

Prognostic relevance of adding MRI data to WHO 2016 and cIMPACT‐NOW updates for diffuse astrocytic tumors in adults. Working toward the extended use of MRI data in integrated glioma diagnosis

“…After a second look, the criterion microvascular proliferation (MVP) (present/absent) was re‐evaluated by pathologists (doubtful focal endothelial proliferation to MVP+ or MVP−). Neuroradiologists also re‐evaluated the CE (present/absent) (doubtful CE) (Figure 1), including the detection of developmental venous anomaly, as previously described (15,16. The representativeness of the image‐guided tissue sampling was assessed by matching preoperative MRI and early postoperative MRI (<48 h) for surgical resection or early postoperative CT‐scan (<24 h) for biopsy to analyze the location of the surgically resected or biopsied area (Figure S1).…”

Diffuse glioma manifesting as normal pressure hydrocephalus: A potential pitfall in diagnosis-a case report

“…Moreover, leptomeningeal dissemination after shunting procedures, and subarachnoid adhesions should be considered. Of note, a high prevalence of developmental venous anomaly was recently identified in adult patients with diffuse glioma and it remains to be seen whether it is a potential underlying predisposition or an etiological factor [15] .…”

Neonatal Developmental Venous Anomalies: Clinicoradiologic Characterization and Follow-Up

“…On the other hand, statistically significant associations between DVAs and both primary brain tumors and multiple sclerosis have been previously described. 18,20 Because these disorders are frequent MR imaging indications in adults but very uncommon in the neonatal setting and infancy, the clinical indication itself may act as a confounder in the relationship between age and DVAs. Prospective neuroimaging studies in the healthy population at different ages using standardized imaging protocols are needed to better understand the relationship between age and DVAs.…”

“…[8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16] Moreover, a higher prevalence of DVAs has been described in patients with different pathologies and/or genetic conditions. [17][18][19][20][21] Although DVAs are widely described and characterized in adults, they remain under-reported in the pediatric population. Indeed, there are noticeably fewer studies focusing exclusively on DVAs in this age group, especially in the neonatal period.…”

“…Indeed, there are noticeably fewer studies focusing exclusively on DVAs in this age group, especially in the neonatal period. 17,18,[21][22][23][24] In particular, the largest case series of neonatal DVAs described so far included 14 neonates, mostly detected using ultrasound during routine scanning for other reasons, 22 with limited information on the prevalence and perinatal characteristics of these vascular abnormalities, including complications and longitudinal evolution. Moreover, additional data on neonatal and fetal DVAs would be of great interest because there is an ongoing debate regarding their congenital or postnatal etiology.…”