J Korean Neurosurg Soc.  2021 Jul;64(4):514-523. 10.3340/jkns.2020.0255.

An Efficient Method for Aneurysm Volume Quantification Applicable in Any Shape and Modalities

Affiliations
  • 1Department of Neurosurgery, Dankook University College of Medicine, Cheonan, Korea

Abstract


Objective
: Aneurysm volume quantification (AVQ) using the equation of ellipsoid volume is widely used although it is inaccurate. Furthermore, AVQ with 3-dimensional (3D) rendered data has limitations in general use. A novel universal method for AVQ is introduced for any diagnostic modality and application to any shape of aneurysms.
Methods
: Relevant AVQ studies published from January 1997 to June 2019 were identified to determine common methods of AVQ. The basic idea is to eliminate the normal artery volume from 3D model with the aneurysm. After Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine (DICOM) data is converted and exported to stereolithography (STL) file format, the 3D STL model is modified to remove the aneurysm and the volume difference between the 3D model with/without the aneurysm is defined as the aneurysm volume. Fifty randomly selected aneurysms from DICOM database were used to validate the different AVQ methods.
Results
: We reviewed and categorized AVQ methods in 121 studies. Approximately 60% used the ellipsoid method, while 24% used the 3D model. For 50 randomly selected aneurysms, volumes were measured using 3D Slicer, RadiAnt, and ellipsoid method. Using 3D Slicer as the reference, the ratios of mean difference to mean volume obtained by RadiAnt and ellipsoid method were -1.21±7.46% and 4.04±30.54%, respectively. The deviations between RadiAnt and 3D Slicer were small despite of aneurysm shapes, but those of ellipsoid method and 3D Slicer were large.
Conclusion
: In spite of inaccuracy, ellipsoid method is still mostly used. We propose a novel universal method for AVQ that is valid, low cost, and easy to use.

Keyword

Intracranial aneurysm; Volume quantification; Ellipsoid method; 3D model

Figure

  • Fig. 1. Aneurysm volume of saccular and fusiform aneurysm. A : Classically, aneurysm volume can be defined as an outpouching lesion above the aneurysm neck in the saccular aneurysm. B : However, aneurysm neck may be frustrating in the fusiform aneurysm. C and D : Therefore, in this paper, the aneurysm volume is defined as the volume of the remaining part after removing the artery component.

  • Fig. 2. The basic concept of the proposed novel aneurysm volume quantification method. Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine data is converted to the 3-dimensional (3D) model and exported to a 3D STL file format. This 3D to stereolithography (STL) model is modified to reach the normal vasculature. The volume difference between 3D STL model with/without the aneurysm is defined as the aneurysm volume.

  • Fig. 3. The trend of aneurysm volume quantification (AVQ) methods. The ellipsoid method is still a major AVQ method although its limitations (approximately 60%). AVQ method using the 3-dimensional model does not exceed one third in 5 year basis. N/A : not applicable.

  • Fig. 4. A and B : Bland-Altman plots of RadiAnt-3-dimensional (3D) slicer and ellipsoid method-3D slicer. Standard deviation in Bland-Altman plots of RadiAnt-3D slicer is within 10% of mean volume difference while standard deviation in Bland-Altman plots of ellipsoid method-3D slicer is beyond 10% of mean volume difference. Red line : 10% volume difference reference line, Black broken line : standard deviation, Blue broken line : mean volume difference to mean volume in percentile.

  • Fig. 5. Comparison of Bland-Altman plots by different aneurysm shapes. The standard deviation in Bland-Altman plots of RadiAnt-3-dimensional (3D) slicer is within 10% of mean volume difference in both non-lobulated and lobulated aneurysm shape (A and C). On the contrary, the standard deviation in Bland-Altman plots of ellipsoid method-3D slicer is beyond 10% of mean volume difference (B and D). Bland-Altman plots of RadiAnt-3D slicer in fusiform aneurysm is also demonstrated to show that current aneurysm volume quantification method is also applicable in fusiform aneurysm (E). Red line : reference line of 10% volume difference, Black broken line : standard deviation, Blue broken line : mean volume difference to mean volume in percentile.


Reference

References

1. Abi-Aad KR, Aoun RJN, Rahme RJ, Ward JD, Kniss J, Kwasny MJ, et al. New generation hydrogel endovascular aneurysm treatment trial (HEAT): a study protocol for a multicenter randomized controlled trial. Neuroradiology. 60:1075–1084. 2018.
Article
2. Bescós JO, Slob MJ, Slump CH, Sluzewski M, van Rooij WJ. Volume measurement of intracranial aneurysms from 3D rotational angiography: improvement of accuracy by gradient edge detection. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 26:2569–2572. 2005.
3. Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet. 1:307–310. 1986.
Article
4. Can A, Ho AL, Emmer BJ, Dammers R, Dirven CM, Du R. Association between vascular anatomy and posterior communicating artery aneurysms. World Neurosurg. 84:1251–1255. 2015.
Article
5. Chan SH, Wong KS, Woo YM, Chan KY, Leung KM. Volume measurement of the intracranial aneurysm: a discussion and comparison of the alternatives to manual segmentation. J Cerebrovasc Endovasc Neurosurg. 16:358–363. 2014.
Article
6. Costalat V, Maldonado IL, Strauss O, Bonafé A. Toward accurate volumetry of brain aneurysms: combination of an algorithm for automatic thresholding with a 3D eraser tool. J Neurosci Methods. 198:294–300. 2011.
Article
7. Dhar S, Tremmel M, Mocco J, Kim M, Yamamoto J, Siddiqui AH, et al. Morphology parameters for intracranial aneurysm rupture risk assessment. Neurosurgery. 63:185–196. discussion 196-197. 2008.
Article
8. Escobar-de la Garma VH, Zenteno M, Padilla-Vázquez F, San-Juan D, Cerón-Morales A. Comparative analysis of aneurysm volume by different methods based on angiography and computed tomography angiography. Neurosurg Rev. 41:1013–1019. 2018.
Article
9. Fanning NF, O’Dwyer HM, Bowden JA, Brennan PR, Thornton J. Accuracy of voxel-based and algebraic formula-based methods in quantifying cerebral aneurysm volume by 3D-rotational digital subtraction angiography. An in-vitro and in-vivo study. Interv Neuroradiol. 11:35–40. 2005.
Article
10. Fedorov A, Beichel R, Kalpathy-Cramer J, Finet J, Fillion-Robin JC, Pujol S, et al. 3D slicer as an image computing platform for the quantitative imaging network. Magn Reson Imaging. 30:1323–1341. 2012.
Article
11. Ferroli P, Tringali G, Acerbi F, Schiariti M, Broggi M, Aquino D, et al. Advanced 3-dimensional planning in neurosurgery. Neurosurgery 72 Suppl. 1:54–62. 2013.
Article
12. Han Q, Zhao X, Wang C, Chen B, Wang X, Zhang Z, et al. Individualized reconstruction for severe periprosthetic fractures around the tumor prosthesis of knee under assistance of 3D printing technology: a case report. Medicine (Baltimore). 97:e12726. 2018.
13. Ho AL, Mouminah A, Du R. Posterior cerebral artery angle and the rupture of basilar tip aneurysms. PLoS One. 9:e110946. 2014.
Article
14. Jiang H, Shen J, Weng YX, Pan JW, Yu JB, Wan ZA, et al. Morphology parameters for mirror posterior communicating artery aneurysm rupture risk assessment. Neurol Med Chir (Tokyo). 55:498–504. 2015.
Article
15. Jiang H, Weng YX, Zhu Y, Shen J, Pan JW, Zhan RY. Patient and aneurysm characteristics associated with rupture risk of multiple intracranial aneurysms in the anterior circulation system. Acta Neurochir (Wien). 158:1367–1375. 2016.
Article
16. Kawanabe Y, Sadato A, Taki W, Hashimoto N. Endovascular occlusion of intracranial aneurysms with Guglielmi detachable coils: correlation between coil packing density and coil compaction. Acta Neurochir (Wien). 143:451–455. 2001.
Article
17. Leng B, Zheng Y, Ren J, Xu Q, Tian Y, Xu F. Endovascular treatment of intracranial aneurysms with detachable coils: correlation between aneurysm volume, packing, and angiographic recurrence. J Neurointerv Surg. 6:595–599. 2014.
Article
18. Lin N, Ho A, Charoenvimolphan N, Frerichs KU, Day AL, Du R. Analysis of morphological parameters to differentiate rupture status in anterior communicating artery aneurysms. PLoS One. 8:e79635. 2013.
Article
19. Lin N, Ho A, Gross BA, Pieper S, Frerichs KU, Day AL, et al. Differences in simple morphological variables in ruptured and unruptured middle cerebral artery aneurysms. J Neurosurg. 117:913–919. 2012.
Article
20. Munkvold BKR, Bø HK, Jakola AS, Reinertsen I, Berntsen EM, Unsgård G, et al. Tumor volume assessment in low-grade gliomas: a comparison of preoperative magnetic resonance imaging to coregistered intraoperative 3-dimensional ultrasound recordings. Neurosurgery. 83:288–296. 2018.
Article
21. Murayama Y, Viñuela F, Ishii A, Nien YL, Yuki I, Duckwiler G, et al. Initial clinical experience with matrix detachable coils for the treatment of intracranial aneurysms. J Neurosurg. 105:192–199. 2006.
Article
22. Otani T, Nakamura M, Fujinaka T, Hirata M, Kuroda J, Shibano K, et al. Computational fluid dynamics of blood flow in coil-embolized aneurysms: effect of packing density on flow stagnation in an idealized geometry. Med Biol Eng Comput. 51:901–910. 2013.
Article
23. Piotin M, Daghman B, Mounayer C, Spelle L, Moret J. Ellipsoid approximation versus 3D rotational angiography in the volumetric assessment of intracranial aneurysms. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 27:839–842. 2006.
24. Reul J, Spetzger U, Weis J, Sure U, Gilsbach JM, Thron A. Endovascular occlusion of experimental aneurysms with detachable coils: influence of packing density and perioperative anticoagulation. Neurosurgery. 41:1160–1165. discussion 1165-1168. 1997.
Article
25. Sadato A, Hayakawa M, Adachi K, Nakahara I, Hirose Y. Large residual volume, not low packing density, is the most influential risk factor for recanalization after coil embolization of cerebral aneurysms. PLoS One. 11:e0155062. 2016.
Article
26. Sadato A, Hayakawa M, Tanaka T, Hirose Y. Comparison of cerebral aneurysm volumes as determined by digitally measured 3D rotational angiography and approximation from three diameters. Interv Neuroradiol. 17:154–158. 2011.
Article
27. Satoh K, Matsubara S, Hondoh H, Nagahiro S. Intracranial aneurysm embolization using interlocking detachable coils. Correlation between volume embolization rate and coil compaction. Interv Neuroradiol 3 Suppl. 2:125–128. 1997.
28. Sluzewski M, van Rooij WJ, Slob MJ, Bescós JO, Slump CH, Wijnalda D. Relation between aneurysm volume, packing, and compaction in 145 cerebral aneurysms treated with coils. Radiology. 231:653–658. 2004.
Article
29. Sokolowski JD, Ilyas A, Buell TJ, Taylor DG, Chen CJ, Ding D, et al. SMART coils for intracranial aneurysm embolization: follow-up outcomes. J Clin Neurosci. 59:93–97. 2019.
Article
30. Stapleton CJ, Torok CM, Rabinov JD, Walcott BP, Mascitelli JR, Leslie-Mazwi TM, et al. Validation of the modified Raymond-Roy classification for intracranial aneurysms treated with coil embolization. J Neurointerv Surg. 8:927–933. 2016.
Article
31. Strik HM, Borchert H, Fels C, Knauth M, Rienhoff O, Bähr M, et al. Three-dimensional reconstruction and volumetry of intracranial haemorrhage and its mass effect. Neuroradiology. 47:417–424. 2005.
Article
32. Takao H, Ishibashi T, Saguchi T, Arakawa H, Ebara M, Irie K, et al. Validation and initial application of a semiautomatic aneurysm measurement software: a tool for assessing volumetric packing attenuation. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 35:721–726. 2014.
Article
33. Wakhloo AK, Gounis MJ, Sandhu JS, Akkawi N, Schenck AE, Linfante I. Complex-shaped platinum coils for brain aneurysms: higher packing density, improved biomechanical stability, and midterm angiographic outcome. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 28:1395–1400. 2007.
Article
34. Zhao R, Shen J, Huang QH, Nie JH, Xu Y, Hong B, et al. Endovascular treatment of ruptured tiny, wide-necked posterior communicating artery aneurysms using a modified stent-assisted coiling technique. J Clin Neurosci. 20:1377–1381. 2013.
Article
Full Text Links
  • JKNS
Actions
Cited
CITED
export Copy
Close
Share
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
Similar articles
Copyright © 2024 by Korean Association of Medical Journal Editors. All rights reserved.     E-mail: koreamed@kamje.or.kr