Accuracy of percentage of signal intensity recovery and relative cerebral blood volume derived from dynamic susceptibility-weighted, contrast-enhanced MRI in the preoperative diagnosis of cerebral tumours

Conventional magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is the technique of choice for diagnosis of cerebral tumours, and has become an increasingly powerful tool for their evaluation; however, the diagnosis of common contrast-enhancing lesions can be challenging, as it is sometimes impossible to differentiate them using conventional imaging. Histopathological analysis of biopsy specimens is the gold standard for diagnosis; however, there are significant risks associated with the invasive procedure and definitive diagnosis is not always achieved. Early accurate diagnosis is important, as management differs accordingly. Advanced MRI techniques have increasing utility for aiding diagnosis in a variety of clinical scenarios. Dynamic susceptibility-weighted contrast-enhanced (DSC) MRI is a perfusion imaging technique and a potentially important tool for the characterisation of cerebral tumours. The percentage of signal intensity recovery (PSR) and relative cerebral blood volume (rCBV) derived from DSC MRI provide information about tumour capillary permeability and neoangiogenesis, which can be used to characterise tumour type and grade, and distinguish tumour recurrence from treatment-related effects. Therefore, PSR and rCBV potentially represent a non-invasive means of diagnosis; however, the clinical utility of these parameters has yet to be established. We present a review of the literature to date.

[1]  K A Smitha,et al.  Relative percentage signal intensity recovery of perfusion metrics—an efficient tool for differentiating grades of glioma. , 2015, The British journal of radiology.

[2]  K. Lovblad,et al.  State-of-the-art MRI techniques in neuroradiology: principles, pitfalls, and clinical applications , 2015, Neuroradiology.

[3]  M. Muti,et al.  High- and low-grade glioma differentiation: the role of percentage signal recovery evaluation in MR dynamic susceptibility contrast imaging , 2015, La radiologia medica.

[4]  M. Essig,et al.  Principles of T2*‐weighted dynamic susceptibility contrast MRI technique in brain tumor imaging , 2015, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[5]  Z. Xing,et al.  Differentiation of Primary Central Nervous System Lymphomas from High-Grade Gliomas by rCBV and Percentage of Signal Intensity Recovery Derived from Dynamic Susceptibility-Weighted Contrast-Enhanced Perfusion MR Imaging , 2014, Clinical Neuroradiology.

[6]  Girolamo Crisi,et al.  Differences in Dynamic Susceptibility Contrast MR Perfusion Maps Generated by Different Methods Implemented in Commercial Software , 2014, Journal of computer assisted tomography.

[7]  W. Mueller,et al.  Dynamic-susceptibility contrast agent MRI measures of relative cerebral blood volume predict response to bevacizumab in recurrent high-grade glioma. , 2014, Neuro-oncology.

[8]  G. Tedeschi,et al.  Recurrent glioblastoma multiforme versus radiation injury: a multiparametric 3-T MR approach , 2014, La radiologia medica.

[9]  R. Young,et al.  Role of MRI perfusion in improving the treatment of brain tumors , 2013 .

[10]  J. Boxerman,et al.  The Effect of Pulse Sequence Parameters and Contrast Agent Dose on Percentage Signal Recovery in DSC-MRI: Implications for Clinical Applications , 2013, American Journal of Neuroradiology.

[11]  S. Ng,et al.  Differentiation of Primary Central Nervous System Lymphomas and Glioblastomas: Comparisons of Diagnostic Performance of Dynamic Susceptibility Contrast-Enhanced Perfusion MR Imaging without and with Contrast-Leakage Correction , 2013, American Journal of Neuroradiology.

[12]  A. Holodny,et al.  Comparison of the effectiveness of MRI perfusion and fluorine-18 FDG PET-CT for differentiating radiation injury from viable brain tumor: a preliminary retrospective analysis with pathologic correlation in all patients. , 2013, Clinical imaging.

[13]  W. Rooney,et al.  Pseudoprogression of glioblastoma after chemo- and radiation therapy: diagnosis by using dynamic susceptibility-weighted contrast-enhanced perfusion MR imaging with ferumoxytol versus gadoteridol and correlation with survival. , 2013, Radiology.

[14]  Max Wintermark,et al.  Perfusion MRI: the five most frequently asked clinical questions. , 2013, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[15]  Guy Cosnard,et al.  Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging to differentiate high-grade gliomas and brain metastases. , 2012, Journal of neuroradiology. Journal de neuroradiologie.

[16]  K. Aldape,et al.  Initial treatment patterns over time for anaplastic oligodendroglial tumors. , 2012, Neuro-oncology.

[17]  Y. Yamada,et al.  Radiation necrosis following treatment of high grade glioma—a review of the literature and current understanding , 2012, Acta Neurochirurgica.

[18]  D. Haynor,et al.  Comparison of 3 Tesla proton MR spectroscopy, MR perfusion and MR diffusion for distinguishing glioma recurrence from posttreatment effects , 2012, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[19]  A. Sorensen,et al.  Pseudoprogression and Pseudoresponse: Imaging Challenges in the Assessment of Posttreatment Glioma , 2011, American Journal of Neuroradiology.

[20]  Kim Mouridsen,et al.  T1- and T*2-Dominant Extravasation Correction in DSC-MRI: Part I—Theoretical Considerations and Implications for Assessment of Tumor Hemodynamic Properties , 2011, Journal of cerebral blood flow and metabolism : official journal of the International Society of Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism.

[21]  Sean S. Park,et al.  Differentiation between intra-axial metastatic tumor progression and radiation injury following fractionated radiation therapy or stereotactic radiosurgery using MR spectroscopy, perfusion MR imaging or volume progression modeling. , 2011, Magnetic resonance imaging.

[22]  S Ekholm,et al.  Percentage Signal Recovery Derived from MR Dynamic Susceptibility Contrast Imaging Is Useful to Differentiate Common Enhancing Malignant Lesions of the Brain , 2011, American Journal of Neuroradiology.

[23]  A. Server,et al.  Measurements of diagnostic examination performance and correlation analysis using microvascular leakage, cerebral blood volume, and blood flow derived from 3T dynamic susceptibility-weighted contrast-enhanced perfusion MR imaging in glial tumor grading , 2011, Neuroradiology.

[24]  D. Kong,et al.  Diagnostic Dilemma of Pseudoprogression in the Treatment of Newly Diagnosed Glioblastomas: The Role of Assessing Relative Cerebral Blood Flow Volume and Oxygen-6-Methylguanine-DNA Methyltransferase Promoter Methylation Status , 2011, American Journal of Neuroradiology.

[25]  Jonathan R. Young,et al.  Advances in MRI Assessment of Gliomas and Response to Anti-VEGF Therapy , 2011, Current neurology and neuroscience reports.

[26]  D. Tampieri,et al.  Imaging in Primary Central Nervous System Lymphoma , 2010, The neuroradiology journal.

[27]  Sanjay Sharma LEVELS OF EVIDENCE , 2007 .

[28]  M. Endo,et al.  Perfusion weighted magnetic resonance imaging to distinguish the recurrence of metastatic brain tumors from radiation necrosis after stereotactic radiosurgery , 2010, Journal of Neuro-Oncology.

[29]  M. J. van den Bent,et al.  Pseudoprogression and pseudoresponse in the treatment of gliomas , 2009, Current opinion in neurology.

[30]  M. Berger,et al.  Differentiation of recurrent glioblastoma multiforme from radiation necrosis after external beam radiation therapy with dynamic susceptibility-weighted contrast-enhanced perfusion MR imaging. , 2009, Radiology.

[31]  P. Cassoni,et al.  Role of diffusion- and perfusion-weighted MR imaging for brain tumour characterisation , 2009, La radiologia medica.

[32]  J E Heiserman,et al.  Relative Cerebral Blood Volume Values to Differentiate High-Grade Glioma Recurrence from Posttreatment Radiation Effect: Direct Correlation between Image-Guided Tissue Histopathology and Localized Dynamic Susceptibility-Weighted Contrast-Enhanced Perfusion MR Imaging Measurements , 2009, American Journal of Neuroradiology.

[33]  B. Tang,et al.  Differentiation of primary central nervous system lymphoma and high-grade glioma with dynamic susceptibility contrast-enhanced perfusion magnetic resonance imaging , 2009, Acta radiologica.

[34]  M R Segal,et al.  Distinguishing Recurrent Intra-Axial Metastatic Tumor from Radiation Necrosis Following Gamma Knife Radiosurgery Using Dynamic Susceptibility-Weighted Contrast-Enhanced Perfusion MR Imaging , 2008, American Journal of Neuroradiology.

[35]  K. Schmainda,et al.  Comparison of dynamic susceptibility-weighted contrast-enhanced MR methods: recommendations for measuring relative cerebral blood volume in brain tumors. , 2008, Radiology.

[36]  A Gregory Sorensen,et al.  Perfusion MR imaging: moving forward. , 2008, Radiology.

[37]  T. Hirai,et al.  Prognostic Value of Perfusion MR Imaging of High-Grade Astrocytomas: Long-Term Follow-Up Study , 2008, American Journal of Neuroradiology.

[38]  Gordon H Guyatt,et al.  GrADe : what is “ quality of evidence ” and why is it important to clinicians ? rATING quALITY of evIDeNCe AND STreNGTH of reCommeNDATIoNS , 2022 .

[39]  A. Waldman,et al.  Low-grade gliomas: do changes in rCBV measurements at longitudinal perfusion-weighted MR imaging predict malignant transformation? , 2008, Radiology.

[40]  C. Avezaat,et al.  Safety and efficacy of frameless and frame-based intracranial biopsy techniques , 2008, Acta Neurochirurgica.

[41]  B. Scheithauer,et al.  The 2007 WHO Classification of Tumours of the Central Nervous System , 2007, Acta Neuropathologica.

[42]  D. Louis,et al.  Survey of treatment recommendations for anaplastic oligodendroglioma. , 2007, Neuro-oncology.

[43]  M. Berger,et al.  Differentiation of Glioblastoma Multiforme and Single Brain Metastasis by Peak Height and Percentage of Signal Intensity Recovery Derived from Dynamic Susceptibility-Weighted Contrast-Enhanced Perfusion MR Imaging , 2007, American Journal of Neuroradiology.

[44]  R M Weisskoff,et al.  Relative cerebral blood volume maps corrected for contrast agent extravasation significantly correlate with glioma tumor grade, whereas uncorrected maps do not. , 2006, AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology.

[45]  A. Jackson,et al.  Do cerebral blood volume and contrast transfer coefficient predict prognosis in human glioma? , 2006, AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology.

[46]  J. Guyotat,et al.  Clinical relevance of diffusion and perfusion magnetic resonance imaging in assessing intra-axial brain tumors , 2006, Neuroradiology.

[47]  Glyn Johnson,et al.  Low-grade gliomas: dynamic susceptibility-weighted contrast-enhanced perfusion MR imaging--prediction of patient clinical response. , 2006, Radiology.

[48]  Karl Herholz,et al.  Imaging in neurooncology , 2005, NeuroRX.

[49]  I. Ercan,et al.  High-grade and low-grade gliomas: differentiation by using perfusion MR imaging. , 2005, Clinical radiology.

[50]  Nancy J Fischbein,et al.  Differentiation of low-grade oligodendrogliomas from low-grade astrocytomas by using quantitative blood-volume measurements derived from dynamic susceptibility contrast-enhanced MR imaging. , 2005, AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology.

[51]  Michael H Lev,et al.  Glial tumor grading and outcome prediction using dynamic spin-echo MR susceptibility mapping compared with conventional contrast-enhanced MR: confounding effect of elevated rCBV of oligodendrogliomas [corrected]. , 2004, AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology.

[52]  Glyn Johnson,et al.  Glioma grading: sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values of perfusion MR imaging and proton MR spectroscopic imaging compared with conventional MR imaging. , 2003, AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology.

[53]  V. Tronnier,et al.  Distinguishing of primary cerebral lymphoma from high-grade glioma with perfusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging , 2003, Neuroscience Letters.

[54]  Glyn Johnson,et al.  Relative cerebral blood volume measurements in intracranial mass lesions: interobserver and intraobserver reproducibility study. , 2002, Radiology.

[55]  Oxford Centre for Evidence-based Medicine Levels of Evidence (January 2001) , 2014 .

[56]  S. Ekholm,et al.  Correlation between progression free survival and dynamic susceptibility contrast MRI perfusion in WHO grade III glioma subtypes , 2013, Journal of Neuro-Oncology.

[57]  M. Essig,et al.  Perfusion MRI: the five most frequently asked technical questions. , 2013, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[58]  Timothy A. Chan,et al.  MRI perfusion in determining pseudoprogression in patients with glioblastoma. , 2013, Clinical imaging.

[59]  S. Paek,et al.  Stereotactic biopsy for intracranial lesions: reliability and its impact on the planning of treatment , 2003, Acta Neurochirurgica.

[60]  R. Barnard,et al.  The classification of tumours of the central nervous system. , 1982, Neuropathology and applied neurobiology.