Assessing Tumor Volume for Sporadic Vestibular Schwannomas: A Comparison of Methods of Volumetry.

Introduction: The size of vestibular schwannomas (VS) is a major factor guiding the initial decision of treatment and the definition of tumor control or failure. Accurate measurement and standardized definition are mandatory; yet no standard exist. Various approximation methods using linear measures or segmental volumetry have been reported. We reviewed different methods of volumetry and evaluated their correlation and agreement using our own historical cohort.

Methods: We selected patients treated for sporadic VS by Gammaknife radiosurgery (GKRS) in our department. Using the stereotactic 3D T1 enhancing MRI on the day of GKRS, 4 methods of volumetry using linear measurements (5-axis, 3-axis, 3-axis-averaged, and 1-axis) and segmental volumetry were compared to each other. The degree of correlation was evaluated using an intraclass correlation test (ICC 3,1). The agreement between the different methods was evaluated using Bland-Altman diagrams.

Results: A total of 2,188 patients were included. We observed an excellent ICC between 5-axis volumetry (0.98), 3-axis volumetry (0.96), and 3-axis-averaged volumetry (0.96) and segmental volumetry, respectively, irrespective of the Koos grade or Ohata classification. The ICC for 1-axis volumetry was lower (0.72) and varied depending on the Koos and Ohata subgroups. None of these methods were substitutable.

Conclusion: Although segmental volumetry is deemed the most accurate method, it takes more effort and requires sophisticated computation systems compared to methods of volumetry using linear measurements. 5-axis volumetry affords the best adequacy with segmental volumetry among all methods under assessment, irrespective of the shape of the tumor. 1-axis volumetry should not be used.