4.4 Article

Identifying the association between contrast enhancement pattern, surgical resection, and prognosis in anaplastic glioma patients

期刊

NEURORADIOLOGY
卷 58, 期 4, 页码 367-374

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00234-016-1640-y

关键词

Anaplastic glioma; Contrast enhancement; Pattern; Survival; Magnetic resonance imaging

资金

  1. National High Technology Research and Development Program [2011CB707804, 2015CB755500]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81271541]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Contrast enhancement observable on magnetic resonance (MR) images reflects the destructive features of malignant gliomas. This study aimed to investigate the relationship between radiologic patterns of tumor enhancement, extent of resection, and prognosis in patients with anaplastic gliomas (AGs). Clinical data from 268 patients with histologically confirmed AGs were retrospectively analyzed. Contrast enhancement patterns were classified based on preoperative T1-contrast MR images. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to evaluate the prognostic value of MR enhancement patterns on progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). The pattern of tumor contrast enhancement was associated with the extent of surgical resection in AGs. A gross total resection was more likely to be achieved for AGs with focal enhancement than those with diffuse (p = 0.001) or ring-like (p = 0.024) enhancement. Additionally, patients with focal-enhanced AGs had a significantly longer PFS and OS than those with diffuse (log-rank, p = 0.025 and p = 0.031, respectively) or ring-like (log-rank, p = 0.008 and p = 0.011, respectively) enhanced AGs. Furthermore, multivariate analysis identified the pattern of tumor enhancement as a significant predictor of PFS (p = 0.016, hazard ratio [HR] = 1.485) and OS (p = 0.030, HR = 1.446). Our results suggested that the contrast enhancement pattern on preoperative MR images was associated with the extent of resection and predictive of survival outcomes in AG patients.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据