English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Purpose  Relative cerebral blood volume (rCBV) is the most widely used parameter derived from DSC perfusion MR imaging for predicting brain tumor aggressiveness. However, accurate rCBV estimation is challenging in enhancing glioma, because of contrast agent extravasation through a disrupted blood-brain barrier (BBB), and even for nonenhancing glioma with an intact BBB, due to an elevated steady-state contrast agent concentration in the vasculature after first passage. In this study a thorough investigation of the effects of two different leakage correction algorithms on rCBV estimation for enhancing and nonenhancing tumors was conducted.    Methods  Two datasets were used retrospectively in this study: 1. A publicly available TCIA dataset (49 patients with 35 enhancing and 14 nonenhancing glioma); 2. A dataset acquired clinically at Erasmus MC (EMC, Rotterdam, NL) (47 patients with 20 enhancing and 27 nonenhancing glial brain lesions). The leakage correction algorithms investigated in this study were: a unidirectional model-based algorithm with flux of contrast agent from the intra- to the extravascular extracellular space (EES); and a bidirectional model-based algorithm additionally including flow from EES to the intravascular space.    Results  In enhancing glioma, the estimated average contrast-enhanced tumor rCBV significantly (Bonferroni corrected Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test, p < 0.05) decreased across the patients when applying unidirectional and bidirectional correction: 4.00 ± 2.11 (uncorrected), 3.19 ± 1.65 (unidirectional), and 2.91 ± 1.55 (bidirectional) in TCIA dataset and 2.51 ± 1.3 (uncorrected), 1.72 ± 0.84 (unidirectional), and 1.59 ± 0.9 (bidirectional) in EMC dataset. In nonenhancing glioma, a significant but smaller difference in observed rCBV was found after application of both correction methods used in this study: 1.42 ± 0.60 (uncorrected), 1.28 ± 0.46 (unidirectional), and 1.24 ± 0.37 (bidirectional) in TCIA dataset and 0.91 ± 0.49 (uncorrected), 0.77 ± 0.37 (unidirectional), and 0.67 ± 0.34 (bidirectional) in EMC dataset.    Conclusion  Both leakage correction algorithms were found to change rCBV estimation with BBB disruption in enhancing glioma, and to a lesser degree in nonenhancing glioma. Stronger effects were found for bidirectional leakage correction than for unidirectional leakage correction.

Effect of Applying Leakage Correction on rCBV Measurement Derived From DSC-MRI in Enhancing and Nonenhancing Glioma