Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Clinical validation of semi-automated software for volumetric and dynamic contrast enhancement analysis of soft tissue venous malformations on Magnetic Resonance Imaging examination

  • Vascular-Interventional
  • Published:
European Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objectives

To evaluate venous malformation (VM) volume and contrast-enhancement analysis on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) compared with diameter evaluation.

Methods

Baseline MRI was undertaken in 44 patients, 20 of whom were followed by MRI after sclerotherapy. All patients underwent short-tau inversion recovery (STIR) acquisitions and dynamic contrast assessment. VM diameters in three orthogonal directions were measured to obtain the largest and mean diameters. Volumetric reconstruction of VM was generated from two orthogonal STIR sequences and fused with acquisitions after contrast medium injection. Reproducibility (interclass correlation coefficients [ICCs]) of diameter and volume measurements was estimated. VM size variations in diameter and volume after sclerotherapy and contrast enhancement before sclerotherapy were compared in patients with clinical success or failure.

Results

Inter-observer ICCs were similar for diameter and volume measurements at baseline and follow-up (range 0.87–0.99). Higher percentages of size reduction after sclerotherapy were observed with volume (32.6 ± 30.7 %) than with diameter measurements (14.4 ± 21.4 %; P = 0.037). Contrast enhancement values were estimated at 65.3 ± 27.5 % and 84 ± 13 % in patients with clinical failure and success respectively (P = 0.056).

Conclusions

Venous malformation volume was as reproducible as diameter measurement and more sensitive in detecting therapeutic responses. Patients with better clinical outcome tend to have stronger malformation enhancement.

Key points

• Magnetic resonance imaging readily demonstrates diameters and volumes of venous malformations

• MRI diameter calculations are reproducible in estimating the size of venous malformations

• But volumetric models of malformations are more sensitive in detecting therapeutic response

• Dynamic enhancement is also better assessed with automated volumetric software

• Volumetric analysis of malformations offers promise to guide therapy and assess response

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Dubois J, Soulez G, Oliva VL, Berthiaume MJ, Lapierre C, Therasse E (2001) Soft-tissue venous malformations in adult patients: imaging and therapeutic issues. Radiographics 21:1519–1531

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Rak KM, Yakes WF, Ray RL et al (1992) MR imaging of symptomatic peripheral vascular malformations. AJR Am J Roentgenol 159:107–112

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Trop I, Dubois J, Guibaud L et al (1999) Soft-tissue venous malformations in pediatric and young adult patients: diagnosis with Doppler US. Radiology 212:841–845

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Paltiel HJ, Burrows PE, Kozakewich HP, Zurakowski D, Mulliken JB (2000) Soft-tissue vascular anomalies: utility of US for diagnosis. Radiology 214:747–754

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Blum L, Gallas S, Cottier JP, Sonier Vinikoff CB, Lorette G, Herbreteau D (2004) Percutaneous sclerotherapy for the treatment of soft-tissue venous malformations: a retrospective study of 68 patients. J Radiol 85:107–116

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Jin Y, Lin X, Li W, Hu X, Ma G, Wang W (2008) Sclerotherapy after embolization of draining vein: a safe treatment method for venous malformations. J Vasc Surg 47:1292–1299

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Rautio R, Laranne J, Kahara V, Saarinen J, Keski-Nisula L (2004) Long-term results and quality of life after endovascular treatment of venous malformations in the face and neck. Acta Radiol 45:738–745

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Goyal M, Causer PA, Armstrong D (2002) Venous vascular malformations in pediatric patients: comparison of results of alcohol sclerotherapy with proposed MR imaging classification. Radiology 223:639–644

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Tan KT, Kirby J, Rajan DK, Hayeems E, Beecroft JR, Simons ME (2007) Percutaneous sodium tetradecyl sulfate sclerotherapy for peripheral venous vascular malformations: a single-center experience. J Vasc Interv Radiol 18:343–351

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Flors L, Leiva-Salinas C, Maged IM et al (2011) MR imaging of soft-tissue vascular malformations: diagnosis, classification, and therapy follow-up. Radiographics 31:1321–1340, discussion 1340-1321

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Soulez G, Dubois J, Oliva VI (2009) Soft tissue vascular malformation. In: Hallet JW, Mills J, Earnshaw JJ, Reekers JA, Rooke TW (eds) Comprehensive vascular and endovascular surgery, 2nd edn. Mosby Elsevier, Philadelphia, pp 842–861

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  12. Yakes WF, Pevsner P, Reed M, Donohue HJ, Ghaed N (1989) Symptomatic vascular malformations: Ethanol embolotherapy. Radiology 170:1059–1066

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Suh JSSK, Na JB, Won JY, Hahn SB (1997) Venous malformations: sclerotherapy with a mixture of ethanol and lipiodol. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 20:268–273

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. O’Donovan JC, Donaldson JS, Morello FP, Pensler JM, Vogelzang RL, Bauer B (1997) Symptomatic hemangiomas and venous malformations in infants, children, and young adults: treatment with percutaneous injection of sodium tetradecyl sulfate. AJR Am J Roentgenol 169:723–729

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Miller AB, Hoogstraten B, Staquet M, Winkler A (1981) Reporting results of cancer treatment. Cancer 47:207–214

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Therasse P, Arbuck SG, Eisenhauer EA et al (2000) New guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer, National Cancer Institute of the United States, National Cancer Institute of Canada. J Natl Cancer Inst 92:205–216

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Mayr NA, Taoka T, Yuh WT et al (2000) Comparison of local control and survival prediction with quantitative 3-D tumor volumetry vs. simple diameter measurement by magnetic resonance imaging in cervical cancer. Int J Radiation Oncol Biol Phys 48(1):210

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Kopp C, Theodorou M, Poullos N et al (2012) Tumor shrinkage assessed by volumetric MRI in long-term follow-up after fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy of nonfunctioning pituitary adenoma. Int J Radiat Oncol, Biol, Phys 82:1262–1267

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Lorenzon MZC, Londero V, Linda A, Furlan A, Bazzocchi M (2009) Assessment of breast cancer response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy: Is volumetric MRI a reliable tool? Eur J Radiol 71:82–88

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Akazawa K, Tamaki Y, Taguchi T et al (2008) Potential of reduction in total tumor volume measured with 3D-MRI as a prognostic factor for locally-advanced breast cancer patients treated with primary chemotherapy. Breast J 14:523–531

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Hwang SWAM, Antoniou AJ, Adel M, Malek MA, Heilman CB (2010) Postoperative temporalis muscle atrophy and the use of electrocautery: a volumetric MRI comparison. Skull Base 20:321–326

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Boll DT, Merkle EM, Lewin JS (2004) Low-flow vascular malformations: MR-guided percutaneous sclerotherapy in qualitative and quantitative assessment of therapy and outcome. Radiology 233:376–384

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Choi YH, Han MH, O-Ki K, Cha SH, Chang KH (2002) Craniofacial cavernous venous malformations: percutaneous sclerotherapy with use of ethanolamine oleate. J Vasc Interv Radiol 13:475–482

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Wimmershoff MB, Schreyer AG, Glaessl A et al (2000) Mixed capillary/lymphatic malformation with coexisting port-wine stain: treatment utilizing 3D MRI and CT-guided sclerotherapy. Dermatol Surg 26:584–587

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Dubois JAM (2010) Vascular anomalies: what a radiologist needs to know. Pediatric Radiology 40:895–905

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. van Rijswijk CS, van der Linden E, van der Woude HJ, van Baalen JM, Bloem JL (2002) Value of Dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging in diagnosing and classifying peripheral vascular malformations. AJR Am J Roentgenol 178:1181–1187

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by a clinical research scholarship (to G.S.) from Fonds de la recherche en santé du Québec (FRSQ). Nicolas Piché is an employee of Object Research System.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiology, Hôpital Maisonneuve-Rosemont, Université de Montréal, Montreal, QC, Canada

    Véronique Caty

  2. Department of Radiology, Centre hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal (CHUM), Université de Montréal and Research Centre, CHUM (CRCHUM), Montreal, QC, Canada

    Claude Kauffmann, Marie-France Giroux, Vincent Oliva, Eric Therasse & Gilles Soulez

  3. Department of Radiology, Centre hospitalier universitaire Sainte-Justine and Université de Montréal, Montreal, QC, Canada

    Josée Dubois

  4. Heart Institute Coordinating Centre, Institut de cardiologie de Montréal, Montreal, QC, Canada

    Asmaa Mansour

  5. Object Research System, Montreal, QC, Canada

    Nicolas Piché

  6. Department of Radiology, CHUM – Hôpital Notre-Dame, 1560 Sherbrooke St. East, Montreal, Quebec, Canada, H2L 4M1

    Gilles Soulez

Authors
  1. Véronique Caty
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Claude Kauffmann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Josée Dubois
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Asmaa Mansour
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Marie-France Giroux
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Vincent Oliva
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Nicolas Piché
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Eric Therasse
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Gilles Soulez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gilles Soulez.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Caty, V., Kauffmann, C., Dubois, J. et al. Clinical validation of semi-automated software for volumetric and dynamic contrast enhancement analysis of soft tissue venous malformations on Magnetic Resonance Imaging examination. Eur Radiol 24, 542–551 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-013-3066-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-013-3066-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation