Advanced

AJNR - American Journal of Neuroradiology

This Article Abstract Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via CrossRef Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Dempsey, M. F. Articles by Hadley, D. M. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Dempsey, M. F. Articles by Hadley, D. M.

Measurement of Tumor "Size" in Recurrent Malignant Glioma: 1D, 2D, or 3D?

Mary F. Dempsey^a, Barrie R. Condon^a and Donald M. Hadley^b

^a Department of Clinical Physics, Institute of Neurological Sciences, Southern General Hospital, Glasgow
^b Department of Neuroradiology, Institute of Neurological Sciences, Southern General Hospital, Glasgow

View larger version (96K): [in a new window]   FIG 1. Image showing software used (developed for Alkermes, Inc., by Evergreen Technologies, Inc., 00000, ME) by neuroradiologist to outline areas of enhancement manually on each transverse section to determine tumor volume.

View larger version (15K): [in a new window]   FIG 2. Tumor size measured using 1D and 2D techniques. A, 1D versus 2D technique plotted showing line of equality (r = 0.85; P < .05), B, Difference versus mean of tumor size measured by the two methods.

View larger version (16K): [in a new window]   FIG 3. Tumor size measured using 1D and 3D techniques. A, 1D versus 3D technique plotted showing line of equality (r = 0.44; P < .05). B, Difference versus mean of tumor size measured by the two methods.

View larger version (16K): [in a new window]   FIG 4. Tumor size measured by 2D and 3D techniques. A, 2D versus 3D technique plotted showing line of equality (r = 0.47; P < .05). B, Difference versus mean of tumor size measured by the two methods.