Browsing by Author "Di Ieva, Antonio (12759624300)"

Purpose: Glioblastomas (GBM) and metastases are the most frequent malignant brain tumors in the adult population. Their presentation on conventional MRI is quite similar, but treatment strategy and prognosis are substantially different. Even with advanced MR techniques, in some cases diagnostic uncertainty remains. The main objective of this study was to determine whether fractal, texture, or both MR image analyses could aid in differentiating glioblastoma from solitary brain metastasis. Method: In a retrospective study of 55 patients (30 glioblastomas and 25 solitary metastases) who underwent T2W/SWI/CET1 MRI, quantitative parameters of fractal and texture analysis were estimated, using box-counting and gray level co-occurrence matrix (GLCM) methods. Results: All five GLCM parameters obtained from T2W images showed significant difference between glioblastomas and solitary metastases, as well as on CET1 images except correlation (SCOR), contrary to SWI images which showed different values of two parameters (angular second moment-SASM and contrast-SCON). Only three fractal features (binary box dimension-Dbin, normalized box dimension-Dnorm and lacunarity-λ) measured on T2W and Dnorm measured on CET1 images significantly differed GBMs from solitary metastases. The highest sensitivity and specificity were obtained from inverse difference moment (SIDM) on T2W and SIDM on CET1 images, respectively. Combination of several GLCM parameters yielded better results. The processing of T2W images provided the most significantly different parameters between the groups, followed by CET1 and SWI images. Conclusions: Computational-aided quantitative image analysis may potentially improve diagnostic accuracy. According to our results texture features are more significant than fractal-based features in differentiation glioblastoma from solitary metastasis. © 2019 Elsevier B.V.

BACKGROUND: Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is going to be the third-leading cause of death worldwide, according to the WHO. Two european surveys suggested that adherence to brain trauma guidelines is poor. No study has compared compliance between low- (LMICs) and high-income (UHICs) countries. Hence, this study aimed to investigate differences in the management of severe TBI patients, comparing low- and high-income, and adherence to the BTF guidelines. METHODS: a web-based survey was spread through the global Neuro foundation, different neurosurgical societies, and social media. RESULTS: a total of 803 neurosurgeons participated: 70.4 from UHICs and 29.6% from LMICs. Hypertonic was administered as an early measure by the 73% and 65% of the responders in LMICs and UHICs, respectively (P=0.016). an invasive intracranial pressure monitoring was recommended by the 66% and 58% of the neurosurgeons in LMICs and UHICs, respectively (P<0.001). antiseizure drugs (P<0.001) were given most frequently in LMICs as, against recommendations, steroids (87% vs. 61% and 86% vs. 81%, respectively). in the LMICs both the evacuation of the contusion and decompressive craniectomy were performed earlier than in UHICs (30% vs. 17% with P<0.001 and 44% vs. 28% with P=0.006, respectively). In the LMICs, the head CT control was performed mostly between 12 and 24 hours from the first imaging (38% vs. 23%, P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The current Guidelines on TBI do not always fit to both the resources and circumstances in different countries. Future research and clinical practice guidelines should reflect the greater relevance of TBI in low resource settings. © 2021 Edizioni Minerva Medica.