3D Ultrasound versus Computed Tomography for Tumor Volume Measurement Compared to Gross Pathology-A Pilot Study on an Animal Model
Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review
Standard
3D Ultrasound versus Computed Tomography for Tumor Volume Measurement Compared to Gross Pathology-A Pilot Study on an Animal Model. / Makouei, Fatemeh; Ewertsen, Caroline; Agander, Tina Klitmoller; Olesen, Mikkel Vestergaard; Pakkenberg, Bente; Todsen, Tobias.
In: Journal of Imaging, Vol. 8, No. 12, 329, 2022.Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review
Harvard
APA
Vancouver
Author
Bibtex
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
T1 - 3D Ultrasound versus Computed Tomography for Tumor Volume Measurement Compared to Gross Pathology-A Pilot Study on an Animal Model
AU - Makouei, Fatemeh
AU - Ewertsen, Caroline
AU - Agander, Tina Klitmoller
AU - Olesen, Mikkel Vestergaard
AU - Pakkenberg, Bente
AU - Todsen, Tobias
PY - 2022
Y1 - 2022
N2 - The margin of the removed tumor in cancer surgery has an important influence on survival. Adjuvant treatments, prognostic complications, and financial costs are required when the pathologist observes a close/positive surgical margin. Ex vivo imaging of resected cancer tissue has been suggested for margin assessment, but traditional cross-sectional imaging is not optimal in a surgical setting. Instead, three-dimensional (3D) ultrasound is a portable, high-resolution, and low-cost method to use in the operation room. In this study, we aimed to investigate the accuracy of 3D ultrasound versus computed tomography (CT) to measure the tumor volume in an animal model compared to gross pathology assessment. The specimen was formalin fixated before systematic slicing. A slice-by-slice area measurement was performed to compare the accuracy of the 3D ultrasound and CT techniques. The tumor volume measured by pathological assessment was 980.2 mm(3). The measured volume using CT was 890.4 +/- 90 mm(3), and the volume using 3D ultrasound was 924.2 +/- 96 mm(3). The correlation coefficient for CT was 0.91 and that for 3D ultrasound was 0.96. Three-dimensional ultrasound is a feasible and accurate modality to measure the tumor volume in an animal model. The accuracy of tumor delineation on CT depends on the soft tissue contrast.
AB - The margin of the removed tumor in cancer surgery has an important influence on survival. Adjuvant treatments, prognostic complications, and financial costs are required when the pathologist observes a close/positive surgical margin. Ex vivo imaging of resected cancer tissue has been suggested for margin assessment, but traditional cross-sectional imaging is not optimal in a surgical setting. Instead, three-dimensional (3D) ultrasound is a portable, high-resolution, and low-cost method to use in the operation room. In this study, we aimed to investigate the accuracy of 3D ultrasound versus computed tomography (CT) to measure the tumor volume in an animal model compared to gross pathology assessment. The specimen was formalin fixated before systematic slicing. A slice-by-slice area measurement was performed to compare the accuracy of the 3D ultrasound and CT techniques. The tumor volume measured by pathological assessment was 980.2 mm(3). The measured volume using CT was 890.4 +/- 90 mm(3), and the volume using 3D ultrasound was 924.2 +/- 96 mm(3). The correlation coefficient for CT was 0.91 and that for 3D ultrasound was 0.96. Three-dimensional ultrasound is a feasible and accurate modality to measure the tumor volume in an animal model. The accuracy of tumor delineation on CT depends on the soft tissue contrast.
KW - 3D ultrasound imaging
KW - ex vivo volume analysis
KW - computed tomography
KW - animal model
KW - tumor volume
KW - EX-VIVO
KW - MARGINS
KW - CT
U2 - 10.3390/jimaging8120329
DO - 10.3390/jimaging8120329
M3 - Journal article
C2 - 36547494
VL - 8
JO - Journal of Imaging
JF - Journal of Imaging
SN - 2313-433X
IS - 12
M1 - 329
ER -
ID: 345313380