Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Intraoperative ultrasound in pediatric brain tumors: does the surgeon get it right?

  • Case Report
  • Published:
Child's Nervous System Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Intraoperative ultrasound (iUS) is a valuable tool—inexpensive, adds minimal surgical time, and involves minimal risk. The diagnostic predictive value of iUS is not fully characterized in Pediatric Neurosurgery. Our objective is to determine if surgeon-completed iUS has good concordance with post-operative MRI in estimating extent of surgical resection (EOR) of pediatric brain tumors.

Methods

We reviewed charts of all pediatric brain tumor resections (single institution 2006–2013). Those with iUS and postoperative imaging (<1 week) were included. The surgeon’s estimation of the EOR based on iUS and the post-operative neuroimaging results (gold standard) were collected, as well as information about the patients/tumors.

Results

Two hundred two resections were reviewed and 58 cases were included. Twenty-six of the excluded cases utilized iUS but did not have EOR indicated. The concordance of interpretation between iUS and post-operative MRI was 98.3 %. Of 43 cases where iUS suggested gross total resection, 42 were confirmed on MRI (negative predictive value (NPV), 98 %). All 15 cases where iUS suggested subtotal resection were confirmed on MRI (positive predictive value (PPV), 100 %). Agreement between iUS and post-operative imaging had an overall Kappa score of 0.956, signifying almost perfect agreement.

Conclusion

The results from this study suggest that iUS is reliable with both residual tumor (PPV—100 %) and when it suggests no residual (NPV—98 %) in tumors that are easily identifiable on iUS. However, tumors that were difficult to visualize on iUS were potentially excluded, and therefore, these results should not be extrapolated for all brain tumor types.

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.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Barua E, Johnston J, Fujii J, Dzwonczyk R, Chiocca E, Bergese S (2009) Anesthesia for brain tumor resection using intraoperative magnetic resonance imaging (iMRI) with the polestar N-20 system: experience and challenges. J Clin Anesth 21:371–376

  2. Chacko AG, Kumar NK, Chacko G, Athyal R, Rajshekhar V (2003) Intraoperative ultrasound in determining the extent of resection of parenchymal brain tumours–a comparative study with computed tomography and histopathology. Acta Neurochir 145:743–748 discussion 748

  3. Coburger J, Konig R, Seitz K, Bazner U, Wirtz CR, Hlavac M (2014) Determining the utility of intraoperative magnetic resonance imaging for transsphenoidal surgery: a retrospective study. J Neurosurg 120:346–356

  4. Czyz M, Tabakow P, Weiser A, Lechowicz-Glogowska BE, Zub LW, Jarmundowicz W (2014) The safety and effectiveness of low field intraoperative MRI guidance in frameless stereotactic biopsies of brain tumours-design and interim analysis of a prospective randomized trial. Neurosurg Rev 37:127–137

  5. El Beltagy MA, Aggag M, Kamal M (2010) Role of intraoperative ultrasound in resection of pediatric brain tumors. Childs Nerv Syst 26:1189–1193

  6. Gerganov VM, Samii A, Giordano M, Samii M, Fahlbusch R (2011) Two-dimensional high-end ultrasound imaging compared to intraoperative MRI during resection of low-grade gliomas. J Clin Neurosci 18:669–673

  7. Ivanov M, Wilkins S, Poeata I, Brodbelt A (2010) Intraoperative ultrasound in neurosurgery - a practical guide. Br J Neurosurg 24:510–517

  8. Jankovski A, Francotte F, Vaz G, Fomekong E, Duprez T, Van Boven M, Docquier MA, Hermoye L, Cosnard G, Raftopoulos C (2008) Intraoperative magnetic resonance imaging at 3-T using a dual independent operating room-magnetic resonance imaging suite: development, feasibility, safety, and preliminary experience. Neurosurgery 63:412–424 discussion 424-416

  9. Mair R, Heald J, Poeata I, Ivanov M (2013) A practical grading system of ultrasonographic visibility for intracerebral lesions. Acta Neurochir 155:2293–2298

  10. Moiyadi A, Shetty P (2011) Objective assessment of utility of intraoperative ultrasound in resection of central nervous system tumors: a cost-effective tool for intraoperative navigation in neurosurgery. J Neurosci Rural Pract 2:4–11

  11. Ramina R, Coelho Neto M, Giacomelli A, Barros Jr E, Vosgerau R, Nascimento A, Coelho G (2010) Optimizing costs of intraoperative magnetic resonance imaging. A series of 29 glioma cases. Acta Neurochir 152:27–33

  12. Roth J, Beni-Adani L, Biyani N, Constantini S (2006) Classical and real-time neuronavigation in pediatric neurosurgery. Childs Nerv Syst 22:1065–1071

  13. Roth J, Biyani N, Beni-Adani L, Constantini S (2007) Real-time neuronavigation with high-quality 3D ultrasound SonoWand in pediatric neurosurgery. Pediatr Neurosurg 43:185–191

  14. Senft C, Bink A, Franz K, Vatter H, Gasser T, Seifert V (2011) Intraoperative MRI guidance and extent of resection in glioma surgery: a randomised, controlled trial. Lancet Oncol 12:997–1003

  15. Shah MN, Leonard JR, Inder G, Gao F, Geske M, Haydon DH, Omodon ME, Evans J, Morales D, Dacey RG, Smyth MD, Chicoine MR, Limbrick DD (2012) Intraoperative magnetic resonance imaging to reduce the rate of early reoperation for lesion resection in pediatric neurosurgery. J Neurosurg Pediatr 9:259–264

  16. Shinoura N, Takahashi M, Yamada R (2006) Delineation of brain tumor margins using intraoperative sononavigation: implications for tumor resection. J Clin Ultrasound 34:177–183

  17. Ulrich NH, Burkhardt JK, Serra C, Bernays RL, Bozinov O (2012) Resection of pediatric intracerebral tumors with the aid of intraoperative real-time 3-D ultrasound. Childs Nerv Syst 28:101–109

  18. Unsgaard G, Ommedal S, Muller T, Gronningsaeter A, Nagelhus Hernes TA (2002) Neuronavigation by intraoperative three-dimensional ultrasound: initial experience during brain tumor resection. Neurosurgery 50:804–812 discussion 812

  19. Viera AJ, Garrett JM (2005) Understanding interobserver agreement: the kappa statistic. Fam Med 37:360–363

Download references

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no competing interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Neurosurgery, Department of Surgery, University of British Columbia and BC Children’s Hospital, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada

    Ash Singhal, A. Ross Hengel, Paul Steinbok & D. Doug Cochrane

  2. Division of Pediatric Neurosurgery, B.C. Children’s Hospital, 4480 Oak Street, Room K3-159, Vancouver, BC, V6H 3V4, Canada

    Ash Singhal

Authors
  1. Ash Singhal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. A. Ross Hengel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Paul Steinbok
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. D. Doug Cochrane
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ash Singhal.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Singhal, A., Ross Hengel, A., Steinbok, P. et al. Intraoperative ultrasound in pediatric brain tumors: does the surgeon get it right?. Childs Nerv Syst 31, 2353–2357 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00381-015-2805-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00381-015-2805-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation