scieee AI-readable full text Open interactive document viewer

MEASUREMENT OF RENAL TUMOR SIZE ON MEDICAL IMAGING: THE IMPACT OF 2D VERSUS 3D METHODS ON THE T-STAGE

Saar Vermijs; Joris Vangeneugden; Pieter De Visschere; Pieter De Backer; Karel Decaestecker; Charles Van Praet*; Charlotte Debbaut*

Abstract

Introduction When resecting a localized kidney tumour, surgeons should understand the patient-specific complexity. T-staging helps by classifying the tumour based on its maximal diameter: T1a (≤4cm), T1b (>4-7cm), T2a (>7-10cm) or T2b (>10cm). These thresholds were based on post-op measurements of resected tumours. For treatment planning, however, diameters are measured on pre-op medical images (e.g. CT). Radiologists use three manual methods, varying in accuracy and speed. In this study, these pre-op methods are examined and compared to post-op staging and three new methods are proposed. Materials and Methods Six measurements methods were tested to calculate the tumour diameter in 173 patients. 3D models were segmented on CT for automatic analysis with PyRadiomics. Paired t-tests were used to compare all methods. To identify the method correlating best with surgical complexity, operation time (OT) and estimated blood loss (EBL) were compared (T1a vs. T1b) using unpaired t-tests. Effect sizes (Cohen's d) were used to check their relevance. Results Comparing T-stages to the 2D oblique method (most accurate method currently used), the 3D diameter method upstages 4.0% of the cases, while all other methods downstage several cases (3D volume: 16.8%; 2D ellipsoid: 13.9%; 2D axial: 5.2%; 2D perpendicular: 4.0%). The result of the 3D diameter method is on average 16.9% larger than the post-op diameter. All methods significantly differ between T1a and T1b regarding surgical complexity. For EBL, 2D axial has the largest effect size (d = 0.75), followed by 3D volume (d=0.73). For OT, the post-op diameter has the largest effect size (d=1.35), followed by 3D volume (d=1.26). Discussion and Conclusions This investigation is part of a larger scale project to develop a pre-op planning platform for (partial) nephrectomies. This study shows that the measurement method influences the T-staging, which may directly impact the preferred treatment plan. Hence, surgeons should be aware of the used method.

Full text

CONCLUSION RESULTS MEASUREMENT OF RENAL TUMOR SIZE ON MEDICAL IMAGING THE IMPACT OF 2D VERSUS 3D METHODS ON THE T-STAGE Saar Vermijs1,2,3, Joris Vangeneugden2,3,4, Pieter De Visschere5, Pieter De Backer3,6, Karel Decaestecker2,4,7, Charles Van Praet*2,3,4, Charlotte Debbaut *1,3 BACKGROUND 1IBiTech-BioMMeda, Department of Electronics and Information Systems, Faculty of Engineering and Architecture, Ghent University, Belgium; 2Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ghent University, Belgium; 3CRIG, Belgium; 4Department of Urology, Ghent University Hospital, Belgium; 5Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Ghent University Hospital, Belgium; 6ORSI Academy; Belgium; 7Department of Urology, AZ Maria Middelares Hospital, Belgium - *shared last authors; contact details: [email protected] T1a T1b T2a T2b 10 cm 7 cm 4 cm T-stage When resecting a localized kidney tumor, surgeons should understand the patient-specific complexity. T-staging helps by classifying the tumor based on its maximal diameter. The current thresholds were defined using post-op measurements of resected tumors, while for treatment planning, the maximal diameter is measured on pre-op imaging (e.g. CT). Partial nephrectomy STUDY DESIGN 173 patients Ghent University Hospital 10/2020 –06/2024 Solitary lesion in the ipsilateral kidney Data collection approved by the ethical committee (UZ Gent: BC-07320) 1 2 3 Tumor segmentation on CT Automatic diameter extraction T-stage analysis T1a T1b vs vs … duration blood loss cT-stage pT-stage Surgical complexity Pre-op vs post-op Using six different methods INCLUSION WORKFLOW DERIVED FROM 2D IMAGING DERIVED FROM 3D MODELS 0° 3D diameter* 90° 3D volume* Tumor (T) Sphere (S)VT= VS 2D axial 2D perpendicular AP: anteroposterior ML: mediolateral CC: craniocaudal 2D oblique 2D ellipsoid* Ellipsoid (E) VE= VS Sphere (S) *Three newly proposed methods, while the others are three different methods currently used by radiologists. RENAL TUMOR SIZE MATTERS, BUT WHAT IS THE MOST OPTIMAL MEASUREMENT METHOD? The renal tumor diameter is influenced by the measurement technique; hence, surgeons should be aware of the used method. The newly proposed 3D volume method distinguishes surgical complexity best between T1a and T1b. However, when no 3D model is available, the simple diameter measurement on the axial plane could be sufficient. … pathology (post-op) … 3D diameter … 3D volume … 2D ellipsoid T-stage: from 2D oblique to … # cases Age (years): 64 (53 –71) Sex: 108 (62.4%) male –65 (37.6%) female Surgical nephrectomy technique: 129 (74.6%) partial –44 (25.4%) radical Slice thickness of pre-op CT scan (mm): 1.0 (0.625 –1.0) Time between pre-op CT scan and surgery (days): 23 (13 –47) Median (IQR) or Number (Percentage) Estimated blood loss (ml) Operation time (min) 2D axial 2D perpendicular 2D oblique 2D ellipsoid 3D diameter 3D volumepathology 2D axial 2D perpendicular 2D oblique 2D ellipsoid 3D diameter 3D volumepathology The surgical complexity was evaluated between T1a and T1b T1a T1b T2a T2b