Advertisement

Acta Neurochirurgica

, Volume 155, Issue 12, pp 2293–2298 | Cite as

A practical grading system of ultrasonographic visibility for intracerebral lesions

  • Richard Mair
  • James Heald
  • Ion Poeata
  • Marcel IvanovEmail author
Clinical Article - Neurosurgical Techniques

Abstract

Background

Intraoperative ultrasound for intracranial neurosurgery was largely abandoned in the 1980s due to poor image resolution. Despite many technological advances in ultrasound since then, the use of this imaging modality in contemporary practice remains limited. Our aim was to evaluate the utility of modern intraoperative ultrasound in the resection of a wide variety of intracranial pathologies.

Methods

A total of 105 patients who underwent intracranial lesion resection in a contiguous fashion were prospectively included in the study. Ultrasound images acquired intraoperatively were used to stratify lesions into one of four grades (grades 0–3) on the basis of their ultrasonic echogenicity and border visibility.

Results

Forty-two out of 105 lesions (40 %) were clearly identifiable and had a clear border with normal tissue (grade 3). Fifty-five of 105 lesions (52 %) were clearly identifiable but had no clear border with normal tissue (grade 2). Eight of 105 lesions (8 %) were difficult to identify and had no clear border with normal tissue (grade 1). None (0 %) of the lesions could not be identified (grade 0). High-grade gliomas, cerebral metastases, meningiomas, ependymomas, and haemangioblastomas all demonstrated a median ultrasonic visibility grade of 2 or greater. Low-grade astrocytomas and oligodendrogliomas demonstrated a median ultrasonic visibility grade of 2 or less.

Conclusion

Intraoperative ultrasound can be of tremendous benefit in allowing the surgeon to appraise the location, extent, and local environment of their target lesion, as well as to reduce the risk of preventable complications. We believe that our grading system will provide a useful adjunct to the neurosurgeon when deciding for which lesions intraoperative ultrasound would be useful.

Keywords

Intraoperative imaging Intraoperative ultrasound Ultrasonography Brain tumour imaging 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The lead author would like to express his great appreciation to Mr. Andrew Brodbelt (Consultant Neurosurgeon at the Walton Centre for Neurology and Neurosurgery, Liverpool, UK) for his valuable support with the data collection and for his enthusiastic encouragement of this research.

Conflict of interest

None.

References

  1. 1.
    Ballantine HT Jr, Bolt RH, Hueter TF, Ludwig GD (1950) On the detection of intracranial pathology by ultrasound. Science 112(2914):525–528PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Claus EB, Horlacher A, Hsu L, Schwartz RB, Dello-Iacono D, Talos F, Jolesz FA, Black PM (2005) Survival rates in patients with low-grade glioma after intraoperative magnetic resonance image guidance. Cancer 103:1227–1233PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    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 18:669–673PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Goren O, Monteith SJ, Hadani M, Bakon M, Harnof S (2013) Modern intraoperative imaging modalities for the vascular neurosurgeon treating intracerebral hemorrhage. Neurosurg Focus 34(5):E2PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ivanov M, Wilkins S, Poeata I, Brodbelt A (2010) Intraoperative ultrasound in neurosurgery - a practical guide. Br J Neurosurg 24(5):510–517PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Rygh OM, Selbekk T, Torp SH, Lydersen S, Hernes TA, Unsgaard G (2008) Comparison of navigated 3D ultrasound findings with histopathology in subsequent phases of glioblastoma resection. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 150(10):1033–1041CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Scoccianti S, Magrini SM, Ricardi U, Detti B, Buglione M, Sotti G, Krengli M, Maluta S, Parisi S, Bertoni F, Mantovani C, Tombolini V, De Renzis C, Lioce M, Fatigante L, Fusco V, Muto P, Berti F, Rubino G, Cipressi S, Fariselli L, Lupattelli M, Santoni R, Pirtoli L, Biti G (2010) Patterns of care and survival in a retrospective analysis of 1059 patients with glioblastoma multiforme treated between 2002 and 2007: a multicentre study by the Central Nervous System Study Group of Airo. Neurosurgery 67(2):446–458PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    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(11):997–1003PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Smith JS, Chang EF, Lamborn KR, Chang SM, Prados MD, Cha S, Tihan T, Vandenberg S, McDermott MW, Berger MS (2008) Role of extent of resection in the long-term outcome of low-grade hemispheric gliomas. J Clin Oncol 26:1338–1345PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Solheim O, Selbekk T, Jakola AS, Unsgård G (2010) Ultrasound-guided operations in unselected high grade gliomas—overall results, impact of image quality and patient selection. Acta Neurochir 152:1873–1886PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Solheim O, Selbekk T, Lindseth F, Unsgard G (2009) Navigated resection of giant intracranial meningiomas based on intraoperative 3D ultrasound. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 151:1143–1151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Stummer W, Pichlmeier U, Meinel T, Wiestler OD, Zanella F, Reulen HJ; ALA-Glioma Study Group (2006) Fluorescence-guided surgery with 5-aminolevulinic acid for resection of malignant glioma: a randomised controlled multicentre phase III trial. Lancet Oncol 7:392–401CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Tang H, Sun H, Xie L, Tang Q, Gong Y, Mao Y, Xie Q, Zheng M, Wang D, Zhu H, Zhu J, Feng X, Yao Z, Chen X, Zhou L (2013) Intraoperative ultrasound assistance in resection of intracranial meningiomas. Chin J Cancer Res 25:339–345PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Unsgaard G, Rygh OM, Selbekk T, Müller TB, Kolstad F, Lindseth F, Hernes TA (2006) Intra-operative 3D ultrasound in neurosurgery. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 148(3):235–253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Wang J, Liu X, Hou WH, Dong G, Wei Z, Zhou H, Duan YY (2008) The relationship between intra-operative ultrasonography and pathological grade in cerebral glioma. J Int Med Res 36:1426–1434PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Wirtz CR, Albert FK, Schwaderer M, Heuer C, Staubert A, Tronnier VM, Knauth M, Kunze S (2000) The benefit of neuronavigation for neurosurgery analysed by its impact on glioblastoma surgery. Neurol Res 22(4):354–360PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Xiao F, Tseng MY, Teng LJ, Tseng HM, Tsai JC (2005) Brain abscess: clinical experience and analysis of prognostic factors. Surg Neurol 63(5):442–450PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Wien 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Richard Mair
    • 1
  • James Heald
    • 1
  • Ion Poeata
    • 2
  • Marcel Ivanov
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of NeurosurgeryRoyal Hallamshire HospitalSheffieldUK
  2. 2.Department of Neurosurgery, Hospital Nicolae ObluUniversity of Medicine and Pharmacy Gr. T. PopaIasiRomania

Personalised recommendations