Edema-mass Ratio Based On Magnetic Resonance Imaging As A Preoperative Diagnostic Factor For Posterior Fossa Metastasis

Author(s): Ismail Kaya*, Ilker Deniz Cingoz*, Merve Gursoy, Murat Atar, Gonul Guvenc, Inan Uzunoglu, Meryem Cansu Sahin, Nurullah Yuceer

Journal Name: Current Medical Imaging
Formerly: Current Medical Imaging Reviews

Volume 17 , Issue 6 , 2021

Become EABM
Become Reviewer
Call for Editor

Graphical Abstract:


Background: Peritumoral edema of primary brain tumors is an important cause of morbidity and mortality. The number of studies currently available on the prognostic role of peritumoral brain edema in the posterior fossa is extremely limited.

Objective: Based on the known importance of magnetic resonance imaging in diagnosing supratentorial metastases, this study aimed to investigate the effects of peritumoral edema on survival of patients with posterior fossa metastases and the preoperative diagnostic value of MRI.

Methods: Edema and mass volumes of 49 patients with posterior fossa metastasis, who underwent surgery during 2012–2016, were measured using magnetic resonance imaging. The edema/mass indices were retrospectively calculated and interpreted by evaluating the demographic, clinical, and survival data.

Results: The study consisted of 32 (65.3%) male and 17 (34.7%) female participants, with the mean age ± standard deviation of 47.25±29.25 (17–81) years. Among the 49 patients with posterior fossa metastases, 34 (69.4%) had carcinoma, while 15 (30.6%) had non-carcinoma metastases. The edema/mass indices of patients with carcinoma and non-carcinoma metastases were found to be 14.55±9.64 and 1.34±1.08, respectively, and the difference was statistically significant (p<0.001). The mean survival of patients with carcinoma and non-carcinoma metastases was found to be 642±11.52 days and 726±9.32 days, respectively; however, this difference was not statistically significant (p=0.787).

Conclusion: The edema/mass ratio was found to be a significant diagnostic factor for the prediction of posterior fossa metastases. Further detailed studies are warranted to investigate the effect of edema/mass ratio on survival rate.

Keywords: Edema, magnetic resonance imaging, metastasis, posterior fossa, prognostic factor, survival.

Zhang X, Zhang W, Cao WD, Cheng G, Liu B, Cheng J. A review of current management of brain metastases. Ann Surg Oncol 2012; 19(3): 1043-50.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1245/s10434-011-2019-2] [PMID: 21861219]
Smedby KE, Brandt L, Bäcklund ML, Blomqvist P. Brain metastases admissions in Sweden between 1987 and 2006. Br J Cancer 2009; 101(11): 1919-24.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/sj.bjc.6605373] [PMID: 19826419]
Kanner AA, Suh JH, Siomin VE, Lee SY, Barnett GH, Vogelbaum MA. Posterior fossa metastases: aggressive treatment improves survival. Stereotact Funct Neurosurg 2003; 81(1-4): 18-23.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1159/000075099] [PMID: 14742959]
Wolf A, Kondziolka D. Brain metastases: radiosurgery. Handb Clin Neurol 2018; 149: 129-35.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-811161-1.00010-4] [PMID: 29307350]
Chaichana KL, Rao K, Gadkaree S, et al. Factors associated with survival and recurrence for patients undergoing surgery of cerebellar metastases. Neurol Res 2014; 36(1): 13-25.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1179/1743132813Y.0000000260] [PMID: 24070068]
Yoshida S. Brain metastasis in patients with esophageal carcinoma. Surg Neurol 2007; 67(3): 288-90.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.surneu.2006.05.065] [PMID: 17320640]
Nussbaum ES, Djalilian HR, Cho KH, Hall WA. Brain metastases. Histology, multiplicity, surgery, and survival. Cancer 1996; 78(8): 1781-8.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0142(19961015)78:8<1781::AID-CNCR19>3.0.CO;2-U] [PMID: 8859192]
Merchut MP. Brain metastases from undiagnosed systemic neoplasms. Arch Intern Med 1989; 149(5): 1076-80.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/archinte.1989.00390050066013] [PMID: 2719501]
Ghia A, Tomé WA, Thomas S, et al. Distribution of brain metastases in relation to the hippocampus: implications for neurocognitive functional preservation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2007; 68(4): 971-7.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2007.02.016] [PMID: 17446005]
Barnholtz-Sloan JS, Yu C, Sloan AE, et al. A nomogram for individualized estimation of survival among patients with brain metastasis. Neuro-oncol 2012; 14(7): 910-8.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/neuonc/nos087] [PMID: 22544733]
Sperduto PW, Berkey B, Gaspar LE, Mehta M, Curran W. A new prognostic index and comparison to three other indices for patients with brain metastases: an analysis of 1,960 patients in the RTOG database. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2008; 70(2): 510-4.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2007.06.074] [PMID: 17931798]
Calluaud G, Terrier LM, Mathon B, et al. Peritumoral edema/tumor volume ratio: a strong survival predictor for posterior fossa metastases. Neurosurgery 2019; 85(1): 117-25.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/neuros/nyy222] [PMID: 29893943]
Sunderland GJ, Jenkinson MD, Zakaria R. Surgical management of posterior fossa metastases. J Neurooncol 2016; 130(3): 535-42.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11060-016-2254-2] [PMID: 27619980]
Spennato P, Nicosia G, Quaglietta L, et al. Posterior fossa tumors in infants and neonates. Childs Nerv Syst 2015; 31(10): 1751-72.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00381-015-2783-6] [PMID: 26351228]
Rasalkar DD, Chu WC, Paunipagar BK, Cheng FW, Li CK. Paediatric intra-axial posterior fossa tumours: pictorial review. Postgrad Med J 2013; 89(1047): 39-46.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/postgradmedj-2011-130075] [PMID: 22977284]
Stark AM, Stöhring C, Hedderich J, Held-Feindt J, Mehdorn HM. Surgical treatment for brain metastases: Prognostic factors and survival in 309 patients with regard to patient age. J Clin Neurosci 2011; 18(1): 34-8.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jocn.2010.03.046] [PMID: 20851611]
Panigrahy A, Blüml S. Neuroimaging of pediatric brain tumors: from basic to advanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). J Child Neurol 2009; 24(11): 1343-65.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0883073809342129] [PMID: 19841424]
Lemercier P, Paz Maya S, Patrie JT, Flors L, Leiva-Salinas C. Gradient of apparent diffusion coefficient values in peritumoral edema helps in differentiation of glioblastoma from solitary metastatic lesions. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2014; 203(1): 163-9.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.2214/AJR.13.11186] [PMID: 24951211]
Zhou C, Yang Z, Yao Z, et al. Segmentation of peritumoral oedema offers a valuable radiological feature of cerebral metastasis. Br J Radiol 2016; 89(1063): 20151054.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1259/bjr.20151054] [PMID: 27119727]
Hakyemez B, Erdogan C, Gokalp G, Dusak A, Parlak M. Solitary metastases and high-grade gliomas: radiological differentiation by morphometric analysis and perfusion-weighted MRI. Clin Radiol 2010; 65(1): 15-20.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.crad.2009.09.005] [PMID: 20103416]
Baris MM, Celik AO, Gezer NS, Ada E. Role of mass effect, tumor volume and peritumoral edema volume in the differential diagnosis of primary brain tumor and metastasis. Clin Neurol Neurosurg 2016; 148: 67-71.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.clineuro.2016.07.008] [PMID: 27428485]
Pompili A, Carapella CM, Cattani F, et al. Metastases to the cerebellum. Results and prognostic factors in a consecutive series of 44 operated patients. J Neurooncol 2008; 88(3): 331-7.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11060-008-9572-y] [PMID: 18392776]
Chow KKH, Meola A, Chang SD. Commentary: Peritumoral Edema/Tumor Volume Ratio: A Strong Survival Predictor for Posterior Fossa Metastases. Neurosurgery 2019; 85(1): E18-9.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/neuros/nyy281] [PMID: 29982666]
Meola A, Chow KKH, Chang SD. In Reply: Commentary: Peritumoral Edema/Tumor Volume Ratio: A Strong Survival Predictor for Posterior Fossa Metastases. Neurosurgery 2019; 84(3): E232.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/neuros/nyy574] [PMID: 30629229]

open access plus

Rights & PermissionsPrintExport Cite as

Article Details

Year: 2021
Published on: 02 March, 2021
Page: [762 - 766]
Pages: 5
DOI: 10.2174/1573405617666210303105006

Article Metrics

PDF: 29