Volumetrical measurements in vestibular schwannoma, the influence of slice thickness and patient's repositioning

OBJECTIVE: Conservative treatment in vestibular schwannomas is mainly dependent on optimal tumor size determination. The first objective of this study was to establish interobserver and intraobserver variability and the accuracy and reproducibility of three different measurement methods: one bidimensional and two volumetrical. The second objective was to evaluate the influence of the use of different magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) slice thickness and the influence of patient's repositioning on the measurements' outcome. STUDY DESIGN: Two consecutive studies have been prospectively performed, both mainly concerning volumetrical measurements. SETTING: Both studies were performed in a tertiary academic, multidisciplinary center. PATIENTS: In the first study, 19 patients were included between March 1996 and May 2002, with a total of 52 scans. The second study comprised 14 patients. All patients in the first study had at least two MRI examinations performed according to a standard protocol (T1-weighted gadolinium-enhanced, slice thickness of 3 mm, and interslice gap of 0.3 mm). The population in the second study underwent a conservative wait and scan (W&S) treatment. METHODS: Both studies are discussed separately. In the first study, all scans were measured by four investigators, two of whom performed the measurements twice using three different methods. The first method concerns a manually performed bidimensional surface measurement along the petrous pyramid. The second method concerns a semiautomatic volumetrical measurement on a computer, relying on contour detection, and the last method concerns a fully automatic volume reconstruction also performed on a computer using different gray shade scales.All 14 patients included in the second study underwent three magnetic examinations. Three different T1-weighted gadolinium-enhanced sequences were used: the first using a slice thickness of 1 mm, the second again with 1-mm slice thickness but after having repositioned the patient. In the third sequence, a slice thickness of 3 mm was used. All scans were measured by two investigators using the three different methods, as described previously. RESULTS: The manual surface method shows large intraobserver variability, and its reproducibility is significantly lower compared with volume measurements. Because of a relatively large systematic error in small tumors, sensitivity of growth detection is low. Both volumetrical methods are hardly interobserver- and intraobserver-dependent, and the gray shade method turned out to be the most accurate. Radiologic progression is only significant at a volume increase of at least 50%. The influence of patient repositioning is negligible, whereas the use of 1-mm slice thickness seems to be superior to a 3-mm slice thickness. CONCLUSION: The volumetrical gray shade method is the most accurate method to detect early tumor progression. As tumor increase of at least 50% is needed to be able to speak of statistically significant tumor growth, the absence of radiologic progression does not mean that there is no tumor growth. Repositioning of the patient has no influence on the measurements' outcome, whereas for optimal magnetic resonance imaging examinations, a 1-mm slice thickness protocol seems to be superior