Higher-Resolution Magnetic Resonance Elastography in Meningiomas to Determine Intratumoral Consistency.

BACKGROUND Magnetic resonance elastography (MRE) analyzes shear wave movement through tissue to determine stiffness. In a prior study, measurements with first-generation brain MRE techniques correlated with intraoperative observations of overall meningioma stiffness. OBJECTIVE To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of a higher-resolution MRE technique to preoperatively detect intratumoral variations compared with surgeon assessment. METHODS Fifteen meningiomas in 14 patients underwent MRE. Tumors with regions of distinctly different stiffness were considered heterogeneous. Intratumoral portions were considered hard if there was a significant area ≥6 kPa. A 5-point scale graded intraoperative consistency. A durometer semiquantitatively measured surgical specimen hardness. Statistics included χ, sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predicative values, and Spearman rank correlation coefficient. RESULTS For MRE and surgery, 9 (60%) and 7 (47%) tumors were homogeneous, 6 (40%) and 8 (53%) tumors were heterogeneous, 6 (40%) and 10 (67%) tumors had hard portions, and 14 (93%) and 12 (80%) tumors had soft portions, respectively. MRE sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values were as follows: for heterogeneity, 75%, 100%, 100%, and 87%; for hardness, 60%, 100%, 100%, and 56%; and for softness, 100%, 33%, 86%, and 100%. Overall, 10 tumors (67%) matched well with MRE and intraoperative consistency and correlated between intraoperative observations (P = .02) and durometer readings (P = .03). Tumor size ≤3.5 cm or vascular tumors were more likely to be inconsistent (P < .05). CONCLUSION MRE was excellent at ruling in heterogeneity with hard portions but less effective in ruling out heterogeneity and hard portions, particularly in tumors more vascular or <3.5 cm. MRE is the first technology capable of prospectively evaluating intratumoral stiffness and, with further refinement, will likely prove useful in preoperative planning.

[1]  B. Kendall,et al.  Comparison of consistency of meningiomas and CT appearances , 1979, Neuroradiology.

[2]  Ralph Sinkus,et al.  In vivo brain viscoelastic properties measured by magnetic resonance elastography , 2008, NMR in biomedicine.

[3]  T Ohira,et al.  Prediction of consistency of meningiomas with preoperative magnetic resonance imaging. , 1997, Surgical neurology.

[4]  Fredric B. Meyer,et al.  Use of preoperative magnetic resonance imaging T1 and T2 sequences to determine intraoperative meningioma consistency , 2011, Surgical neurology international.

[5]  Y. Suzuki,et al.  Meningiomas: Correlation between MRI characteristics and operative findings including consistency , 2005, Acta Neurochirurgica.

[6]  W. Mack,et al.  A proposed grading system for standardizing tumor consistency of intracranial meningiomas. , 2013, Neurosurgical focus.

[7]  H. Kashimura,et al.  Prediction of meningioma consistency using fractional anisotropy value measured by magnetic resonance imaging. , 2007, Journal of neurosurgery.

[8]  Clifford R. Jack,et al.  Magnetic resonance elastography of the brain , 2008, NeuroImage.

[9]  R. Ehman,et al.  Magnetic resonance elastography: A review , 2010, Clinical anatomy.

[10]  Armando Manduca,et al.  Preoperative assessment of meningioma stiffness using magnetic resonance elastography. , 2013, Journal of neurosurgery.

[11]  Neil L Dorward,et al.  Slip elastography: a novel method for visualising and characterizing adherence between two surfaces in contact. , 2012, Ultrasonics.

[12]  G. Crisi,et al.  MRI of intracranial meningiomas: correlations with histology and physical consistency , 1993, Neuroradiology.

[13]  Dieter Klatt,et al.  Non‐invasive measurement of brain viscoelasticity using magnetic resonance elastography , 2008, NMR in biomedicine.