Introduction: Meningioma consistency, firmness or softness as it relates to resectability, affects the difficulty of surgery and, to some degree, the extent of resection. Preoperative knowledge of tumor consistency would affect preoperative planning and instrumentation. Several methods of prediction have been proposed, but the majority lack objectivity and reproducibility or generalizability to other surgeons. In a previous pilot study of 20 patients the authors proposed a new method of prediction based on tumor/cerebellar peduncle T2-weighted imaging intensity (TCTI) ratios in comparison with objective intraoperative findings. In the present study they sought validation of this method.

Methods: Magnetic resonance images from 100 consecutive patients undergoing craniotomy for meningioma resection were evaluated preoperatively. During surgery a consistency grade was prospectively applied to lesions by the operating surgeon, as determined by suction and/or cavitron ultrasonic surgical aspirator (CUSA) intensity. Consistency grades were A, soft; B, intermediate; and C, fibrous. Using T2-weighted MRI sequences, TCTI ratios were calculated. Analysis of the TCTI ratios and intraoperative tumor consistency was completed with ANOVA and receiver operator characteristic curves.

Results: Of the 100 tumors evaluated, 50 were classified as soft, 29 as intermediate, and 21 as firm. The median TCTI ratio for firm tumors was 0.88; for intermediate tumors, 1.5; and for soft tumors, 1.84. One-way ANOVA comparing TCTI ratios for these groups was statistically significant (p < 0.0001). A single cutoff TCTI value of 1.41 for soft versus firm tumors was found to be 81.9% sensitive and 84.8% specific.

Conclusions: The authors propose this T2-based method of tumor consistency prediction with correlation to objective intraoperative consistency. This method is quantifiable and reproducible, which expands its usability. Additionally, it places tumor consistency on a graded continuum in a clinically meaningful way that could affect preoperative surgical planning.

Patient Care: This research will potentially improve pre-operative planning for meningioma resection.

Learning Objectives: By conclusion of this session, participants should be able to: 1) Understand value of T2-weighted MRI for tumor consistency; 2) Understand value of utilizing an internal imaging reference for consistency prediction.

References: 1. Carpeggiani P, Crisi G, Trevisan C: MRI of intracranial meningiomas: correlations with histology and physical consistency. Neuroradiology 35:532–536, 1993 2. Chen TC, Zee CS, Miller CA, Weiss MH, Tang G, Chin L, et al: Magnetic resonance imaging and pathological correlates of meningiomas. Neurosurgery 31:1015–1022, 1992 3. Chernov MF, Kasuya H, Nakaya K, Kato K, Ono Y, Yoshida S, et al: ¹H-MRS of intracranial meningiomas: what it can add to known clinical and MRI predictors of the histopathological and biological characteristics of the tumor? Clin Neurol Neurosurg 113:202–212, 2011 4. Hoover JM, Morris JM, Meyer FB: Use of preoperative magnetic resonance imaging T1 and T2 sequences to determine intraoperative meningioma consistency. Surg Neurol Int 2:142, 2011 5. Hughes JD, Fattahi N, Van Gompel J, Arani A, Meyer F, Lanzino G, et al: Higher-Resolution Magnetic Resonance Elastography in Meningiomas to Determine Intratumoral Consistency. Neurosurgery 77:653–659, 2015 6. Kashimura H, Inoue T, Ogasawara K, Arai H, Otawara Y, Kanbara Y, et al: Prediction of meningioma consistency using fractional anisotropy value measured by magnetic resonance imaging. J Neurosurg 107:784–787, 2007 7. Kasoff SS, Spiller M, Valsamis MP, Lansen TA, Duffy KR, Koenig SH, et al: Relaxometry of noncalcified human meningiomas. Correlation with histology and solids content. Invest Radiol 30:49–55, 1995 8. Madabhushi A, Udupa JK, Moonis G: Comparing MR image intensity standardization against tissue characterizability of magnetization transfer ratio imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging 24:667–675, 2006 9. Maiuri F, Iaconetta G, de Divitiis O, Cirillo S, Di Salle F, De Caro ML: Intracranial meningiomas: correlations between MR imaging and histology. Eur J Radiol 31:69–75, 1999 10. Murphy MC, Huston J III, Glaser KJ, Manduca A, Meyer FB, Lanzino G, et al: Preoperative assessment of meningioma stiffness using magnetic resonance elastography. J Neurosurg 118:643–648, 2013 11. Pfisterer WK, Nieman RA, Scheck AC, Coons SW, Spetzler RF, Preul MC: Using ex vivo proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy to reveal associations between biochemical and biological features of meningiomas. Neurosurg Focus 28(1):E12, 2010 12. Robitaille N, Mouiha A, Crepeault B, Valdivia F, Duchesne S: The Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging I: Tissue-based MRI intensity standardization: application to multicentric datasets. Int J Biomed Imaging 2012:347120, 2012 13. Sitthinamsuwan B, Khampalikit I, Nunta-aree S, Srirabheebhat P, Witthiwej T, Nitising A: Predictors of meningioma consistency: A study in 243 consecutive cases. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 154:1383–1389, 2012 14. Smith KA, Leever JD, Chamoun RB: Predicting consistency of meningioma by magnetic resonance imaging. J Neurol Surg B Skull Base 76:225–229, 2015 15. Soyama N, Kuratsu J, Ushio Y: Correlation between magnetic resonance images and histology in meningiomas: T2-weighted images indicate collagen contents in tissues. Neurol Med Chir (Tokyo) 35:438–441, 1995 16. Suzuki Y, Sugimoto T, Shibuya M, Sugita K, Patel SJ: Meningiomas: correlation between MRI characteristics and operative findings including consistency. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 129:39–46, 1994 17. Wang D, Doddrell DM: Method for a detailed measurement of image intensity nonuniformity in magnetic resonance imaging. Med Phys 32:952–960, 2005 18. Watanabe K, Kakeda S, Yamamoto J, Ide S, Ohnari N, Nishizawa S, et al: Prediction of hard meningiomas: quantitative evaluation based on the magnetic resonance signal intensity. Acta Radiol [epub ahead of print], 2015 19. Yamaguchi N, Kawase T, Sagoh M, Ohira T, Shiga H, Toya S: Prediction of consistency of meningiomas with preoperative magnetic resonance imaging. Surg Neurol 48:579–583, 1997 20. Yrjänä SK, Tuominen H, Karttunen A, Lähdesluoma N, Heikkinen E, Koivukangas J: Low-field MR imaging of meningiomas including dynamic contrast enhancement study: evaluation of surgical and histopathologic characteristics. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 27:2128–2134, 2006 21. Zee CS, Chen T, Hinton DR, Tan M, Segall HD, Apuzzo ML: Magnetic resonance imaging of cystic meningiomas and its surgical implications. Neurosurgery 36:482–488, 1995