Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Diagnostic performance of an unenhanced MRI exam for tumor follow-up of the optic pathway gliomas in children

  • Paediatric Neuroradiology
  • Published:
Neuroradiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

A Correction to this article was published on 22 April 2019

This article has been updated

Abstract

Purpose

Contrast-enhanced MRI (MRI + C) is considered as mandatory for brain tumors follow-up, but gadolinium brain depositions in relation with repeated injections have been reported. The aim of our work was to evaluate the diagnostic performance of an unenhanced MRI examination for the follow-up of optic pathway gliomas (OPG) in children.

Methods

Seventeen patients (with/without NF1) were selected from 2001 to 2017, with at least 5 MRI + C brain follow-up examinations. Privacy and data protection rights were addressed by the data protection officer (DPO) and the study was in accordance with the local ethical rules. Twenty-five cases of tumor progression and 25 cases of tumor stability mentioned in the conclusion of radiological reports (defined as gold standard) were isolated. Those exams were anonymized and independently reviewed by two radiologists, who analyzed both quantitative (such as tumor volume variation) and qualitative criteria (such as ventricular dilatation) on unenhanced images. Sensitivity, specificity, positive/negative predictive values (PPV, NPV), and inter/intra-observer agreement were calculated.

Results

The mean age of patients was 5.4 ± 3.4 years and mean follow-up length 6.7 years. The mean number of MRI + C was 13.5 (SD 7.2). The sensitivity of unenhanced MRI for tumor follow-up was 84–88% (95% CI 63.9–97.5). The specificity was 91.3–100% (95% CI 72–100). The PPV was 91.7% for reader 1 and 100% for reader 2. The NVP was 87.5% for reader 1 and 85.2% for reader 2. There was an excellent inter-observer agreement regarding tumor progression: kappa coefficient of 0.87 (p < 0.001). Inter/intra-variability for percentage of tumor volume variation between two exams were good (correlation coefficients of 0.97 and 0.94).

Conclusion

Tumor volume variation is in most cases sufficient to assess OPG progression. Systematic MRI + C could be questionable.

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
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

Change history

  • 22 April 2019

    In the article “Diagnostic performance of an unenhanced MRI exam for tumor follow-up of the optic pathway gliomas in children”, Table 2 data were not presented correctly, with results placed beneath an incorrect heading. Confidence interval also added. The original article has been corrected.

References

  1. Young JR, Orosz I, Franke MA, Kim HJ, Woodworth D, Ellingson BM, Salamon N, Pope WB (2018) Gadolinium deposition in the paediatric brain: T1-weighted hyperintensity within the dentate nucleus following repeated gadolinium-based contrast agent administration. Clin Radiol 73:290–295. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crad.2017.11.005

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Kanda T, Osawa M, Oba H, Toyoda K, Kotoku J’, Haruyama T, Takeshita K, Furui S (2015) High signal intensity in dentate nucleus on unenhanced T1-weighted MR images: association with linear versus macrocyclic gadolinium chelate administration. Radiology 275:803–809

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Errante Y, Cirimele V, Mallio CA, di Lazzaro V, Zobel BB, Quattrocchi CC (2014) Progressive increase of T1 signal intensity of the dentate nucleus on unenhanced magnetic resonance images is associated with cumulative doses of intravenously administered gadodiamide in patients with normal renal function, suggesting dechelation. Investig Radiol 49:685–690. https://doi.org/10.1097/RLI.0000000000000072

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Radbruch A, Weberling LD, Kieslich PJ, Eidel O, Burth S, Kickingereder P, Heiland S, Wick W, Schlemmer HP, Bendszus M (2015) Gadolinium retention in the dentate nucleus and globus pallidus is dependent on the class of contrast agent. Radiology 275:783–791. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2015150337

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Flood TF, Stence NV, Maloney JA, Mirsky DM (2017) Pediatric brain: repeated exposure to linear gadolinium-based contrast material is associated with increased signal intensity at unenhanced T1-weighted MR imaging. Radiology 282:222–228. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2016160356

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Hu HH, Pokorney A, Towbin RB, Miller JH (2016) Increased signal intensities in the dentate nucleus and globus pallidus on unenhanced T1-weighted images: evidence in children undergoing multiple gadolinium MRI exams. Pediatr Radiol 46:1590–1598. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00247-016-3646-3

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Renz DM, Kümpel S, Böttcher J, Pfeil A, Streitparth F, Waginger M, Reichenbach JR, Teichgräber UK, Mentzel HJ (2018) Comparison of unenhanced T1-weighted signal intensities within the dentate nucleus and the globus pallidus after serial applications of gadopentetate dimeglumine versus gadobutrol in a pediatric population. Investig Radiol 53:119–127. https://doi.org/10.1097/RLI.0000000000000419

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Ramalho J, Castillo M, AlObaidy M, Nunes RH, Ramalho M, Dale BM, Semelka RC (2015) High signal intensity in globus pallidus and dentate nucleus on unenhanced T1-weighted MR images: evaluation of two linear gadolinium-based contrast agents. Radiology 276:836–844. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2015150872

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Stojanov DA, Aracki-Trenkic A, Vojinovic S, Benedeto-Stojanov D, Ljubisavljevic S (2016) Increasing signal intensity within the dentate nucleus and globus pallidus on unenhanced T1W magnetic resonance images in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: correlation with cumulative dose of a macrocyclic gadolinium-based contrast agent, gadobutrol. Eur Radiol 26:807–815. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-015-3879-9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Bjørnerud A, Vatnehol SAS, Larsson C, Due-Tønnessen P, Hol PK, Groote IR (2017) Signal enhancement of the dentate nucleus at unenhanced MR imaging after very high cumulative doses of the macrocyclic gadolinium-based contrast agent gadobutrol: an observational study. Radiology 285:434–444. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2017170391

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. McDonald RJ, McDonald JS, Kallmes DF et al (2015) Intracranial gadolinium deposition after contrast-enhanced MR imaging. Radiology 275:772–782. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.15150025

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. McDonald JS, McDonald RJ, Jentoft ME et al (2017) Intracranial gadolinium deposition following gadodiamide-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging in pediatric patients: a case-control study. JAMA Pediatr 171:705–707. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapediatrics.2017.0264

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Maximova N, Gregori M, Zennaro F, Sonzogni A, Simeone R, Zanon D (2016) Hepatic gadolinium deposition and reversibility after contrast agent-enhanced MR imaging of pediatric hematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients. Radiology 281:418–426. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2016152846

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Roberts DR, Lindhorst SM, Welsh CT, Maravilla KR, Herring MN, Adam Braun K, Thiers BH, Davis WC (2016) High levels of gadolinium deposition in the skin of a patient with normal renal function. Investig Radiol 51:280–289. https://doi.org/10.1097/RLI.0000000000000266

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Murata N, Gonzalez-Cuyar LF, Murata K, Fligner C, Dills R, Hippe D, Maravilla KR (2016) Macrocyclic and other non-group 1 gadolinium contrast agents deposit low levels of gadolinium in brain and bone tissue: preliminary results from 9 patients with Normal renal function. Investig Radiol 51:447–453. https://doi.org/10.1097/RLI.0000000000000252

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. White GW, Gibby WA, Tweedle MF (2006) Comparison of Gd(DTPA-BMA) (Omniscan) versus Gd(HP-DO3A) (ProHance) relative to gadolinium retention in human bone tissue by inductively coupled plasma mass spectroscopy. Investig Radiol 41:272–278. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.rli.0000186569.32408.95

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Welk B, McArthur E, Morrow SA, MacDonald P, Hayward J, Leung A, Lum A (2016) Association between gadolinium contrast exposure and the risk of parkinsonism. JAMA 316:96–98. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2016.8096

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Maloney E, Stanescu AL, Perez FA, Iyer RS, Otto RK, Leary S, Steuten L, Phipps AI, Shaw DWW (2018) Surveillance magnetic resonance imaging for isolated optic pathway gliomas: is gadolinium necessary? Pediatr Radiol 48:1472–1484. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00247-018-4154-4

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Binning MJ, Liu JK, Kestle JRW, Brockmeyer DL, Walker ML (2007) Optic pathway gliomas: a review. Neurosurg Focus 23:E2. https://doi.org/10.3171/FOC-07/11/E2

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Rasool N, Odel JG, Kazim M (2017) Optic pathway glioma of childhood. Curr Opin Ophthalmol 28:289–295. https://doi.org/10.1097/ICU.0000000000000370

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Ostrom QT, Gittleman H, Liao P, Vecchione-Koval T, Wolinsky Y, Kruchko C, Barnholtz-Sloan JS (2017) CBTRUS statistical report: primary brain and other central nervous system tumors diagnosed in the United States in 2010-2014. Neuro-oncology 19:v1–v88. https://doi.org/10.1093/neuonc/nox158

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Albers AC, Gutmann DH (2009) Gliomas in patients with neurofibromatosis type 1. Expert Rev Neurother 9:535–539. https://doi.org/10.1586/ern.09.4

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Goodden J, Pizer B, Pettorini B, Williams D, Blair J, Didi M, Thorp N, Mallucci C (2014) The role of surgery in optic pathway/hypothalamic gliomas in children. J Neurosurg Pediatr 13:1–12. https://doi.org/10.3171/2013.8.PEDS12546

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Wan MJ, Ullrich NJ, Manley PE, Kieran MW, Goumnerova LC, Heidary G (2016) Long-term visual outcomes of optic pathway gliomas in pediatric patients without neurofibromatosis type 1. J Neuro-Oncol 129:173–178. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11060-016-2163-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Listernick R, Ferner RE, Liu GT, Gutmann DH (2007) Optic pathway gliomas in neurofibromatosis-1: controversies and recommendations. Ann Neurol 61:189–198. https://doi.org/10.1002/ana.21107

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Ostrom QT, Gittleman H, Fulop J, Liu M, Blanda R, Kromer C, Wolinsky Y, Kruchko C, Barnholtz-Sloan JS (2015) CBTRUS statistical report: primary brain and central nervous system tumors diagnosed in the United States in 2008-2012. Neuro-Oncology 17:iv1–iv62. https://doi.org/10.1093/neuonc/nov189

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Louis DN, Perry A, Reifenberger G, von Deimling A, Figarella-Branger D, Cavenee WK, Ohgaki H, Wiestler OD, Kleihues P, Ellison DW (2016) The 2016 World Health Organization classification of tumors of the central nervous system: a summary. Acta Neuropathol 131:803–820. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00401-016-1545-1

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Czyzyk E, Jóźwiak S, Roszkowski M, Schwartz RA (2003) Optic pathway gliomas in children with and without neurofibromatosis 1. J Child Neurol 18:471–478. https://doi.org/10.1177/08830738030180070401

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Gaudino S, Martucci M, Russo R, Visconti E, Gangemi E, D’Argento F, Verdolotti T, Lauriola L, Colosimo C (2017) MR imaging of brain pilocytic astrocytoma: beyond the stereotype of benign astrocytoma. Childs Nerv Syst 33:35–54. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00381-016-3262-4

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Sato K, Rorke LB (1989) Vascular bundles and wickerworks in childhood brain tumors. Pediatr Neurosci 15:105–110

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Fulham MJ, Melisi JW, Nishimiya J, Dwyer AJ, di Chiro G (1993) Neuroimaging of juvenile pilocytic astrocytomas: an enigma. Radiology 189:221–225. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiology.189.1.8372197

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Gaudino S, Quaglio FR, Schiarelli C, Martucci M, Tartaglione T, Gualano MR, di Lella GM, Colosimo C (2012) Spontaneous modifications of contrast enhancement in childhood non-cerebellar pilocytic astrocytomas. Neuroradiology 54:989–995. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00234-012-1010-3

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Fisher MJ, Loguidice M, Gutmann DH, Listernick R, Ferner RE, Ullrich NJ, Packer RJ, Tabori U, Hoffman RO, Ardern-Holmes SL, Hummel TR, Hargrave DR, Bouffet E, Charrow J, Bilaniuk LT, Balcer LJ, Liu GT (2012) Visual outcomes in children with neurofibromatosis type 1-associated optic pathway glioma following chemotherapy: a multicenter retrospective analysis. Neuro-Oncology 14:790–797. https://doi.org/10.1093/neuonc/nos076

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Kelly JP, Leary S, Khanna P, Weiss AH (2012) Longitudinal measures of visual function, tumor volume, and prediction of visual outcomes after treatment of optic pathway gliomas. Ophthalmology 119:1231–1237. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2011.12.035

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Shofty B, Mauda-Havakuk M, Weizman L, Constantini S, Ben-Bashat D, Dvir R, Pratt LT, Joskowicz L, Kesler A, Yalon M, Ravid L, Ben-Sira L (2015) The effect of chemotherapy on optic pathway gliomas and their sub-components: a volumetric MR analysis study. Pediatr Blood Cancer 62:1353–1359. https://doi.org/10.1002/pbc.25480

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Taylor T, Jaspan T, Milano G et al (2008) Radiological classification of optic pathway gliomas: experience of a modified functional classification system. Br J Radiol 81:761–766. https://doi.org/10.1259/bjr/65246351

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Dodge HW, Love JG, Craig WM et al (1958) Gliomas of the optic nerves. AMA Arch Neurol Psychiatry 79:607–621

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Lee AG (2007) Neuroophthalmological management of optic pathway gliomas. Neurosurg Focus 23:E1. https://doi.org/10.3171/FOC-07/11/E1

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Lambron J, Rakotonjanahary J, Loisel D, Frampas E, de Carli E, Delion M, Rialland X, Toulgoat F (2016) Can we improve accuracy and reliability of MRI interpretation in children with optic pathway glioma? Proposal for a reproducible imaging classification. Neuroradiology 58:197–208. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00234-015-1612-7

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Weizman L, Ben Sira L, Joskowicz L, Constantini S, Precel R, Shofty B, Ben Bashat D (2012) Automatic segmentation, internal classification, and follow-up of optic pathway gliomas in MRI. Med Image Anal 16:177–188. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.media.2011.07.001

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Sorensen AG, Patel S, Harmath C, Bridges S, Synnott J, Sievers A, Yoon YH, Lee EJ, Yang MC, Lewis RF, Harris GJ, Lev M, Schaefer PW, Buchbinder BR, Barest G, Yamada K, Ponzo J, Kwon HY, Gemmete J, Farkas J, Tievsky AL, Ziegler RB, Salhus MRC, Weisskoff R (2001) Comparison of diameter and perimeter methods for tumor volume calculation. J Clin Oncol 19:551–557. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2001.19.2.551

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Liu J, Udupa JK, Odhner D, Hackney D, Moonis G (2005) A system for brain tumor volume estimation via MR imaging and fuzzy connectedness. Comput Med Imaging Graph 29:21–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compmedimag.2004.07.008

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Kanda T, Ishii K, Kawaguchi H, Kitajima K, Takenaka D (2014) High signal intensity in the dentate nucleus and globus pallidus on unenhanced T1-weighted MR images: relationship with increasing cumulative dose of a gadolinium-based contrast material. Radiology 270:834–841. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.13131669

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Splendiani A, Perri M, Marsecano C, Vellucci V, Michelini G, Barile A, di Cesare E (2018) Effects of serial macrocyclic-based contrast materials gadoterate meglumine and gadobutrol administrations on gadolinium-related dentate nuclei signal increases in unenhanced T1-weighted brain: a retrospective study in 158 multiple sclerosis (MS) patients. Radiol Med 123:125–134. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11547-017-0816-9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Frenzel T, Lengsfeld P, Schirmer H, Hütter J, Weinmann HJ (2008) Stability of gadolinium-based magnetic resonance imaging contrast agents in human serum at 37 degrees C. Investig Radiol 43:817–828. https://doi.org/10.1097/RLI.0b013e3181852171

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Jittapiromsak N, Hou P, Liu H-L, Sun J, Slopis JM, Chi TL (2017) Prognostic role of conventional and dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI in optic pathway gliomas: conventional and DCE MRI in optic pathway glioma. J Neuroimaging 27:594–601. https://doi.org/10.1111/jon.12450

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Strong JA, Hatten HP, Brown MT et al (1993) Pilocytic astrocytoma: correlation between the initial imaging features and clinical aggressiveness. Am J Roentgenol 161:369–372. https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.161.2.8333380

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

To Julie Blanchard for her assistance in the preparation of imaging data.

Funding

This study was not supported by any funding.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Pediatric Radiology, Pellegrin Children’s Hospital, Place Amelie Raba-Leon, 33076, Bordeaux, France

    Pierre Marsault, Fanny Menut, Pierre Bessou, Marion Havez-Enjolras & Jean-François Chateil

  2. Department of Pediatric Hematology and Oncology, Pellegrin Children’s Hospital, Place Amelie Raba-Leon, 33076, Bordeaux, France

    Stéphane Ducassou

  3. CRMSB, UMR 5536, CNRS/University of Bordeaux, 146 rue Leo Saignat, 33076, Bordeaux Cedex, France

    Jean-François Chateil

Authors
  1. Pierre Marsault
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Stéphane Ducassou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Fanny Menut
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Pierre Bessou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Marion Havez-Enjolras
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Jean-François Chateil
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Pierre Marsault.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. For this type of study, formal consent is not required.

Informed consent

For this type of study, consent is not required.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

"The original version of this article was revised:" Table 2 data were not presented correctly, with results placed beneath an incorrect heading. Confidence interval also added.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Marsault, P., Ducassou, S., Menut, F. et al. Diagnostic performance of an unenhanced MRI exam for tumor follow-up of the optic pathway gliomas in children. Neuroradiology 61, 711–720 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00234-019-02198-w

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00234-019-02198-w

Keywords

Search

Navigation