ArticleScientific reports2020
MRI based volumetric measurements of vestibular schwannomas in patients with neurofibromatosis type 2: comparison of three different software tools.
Article in Scientific reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 37 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinician Perspectives of a Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Based 3D Volumetric Analysis Tool for Neurofibromatosis Type 2-Related Schwannomatosis: Qualitative Pilot Study.JMIR human factors · 2025Article
- Dorsal Root Ganglia Volume-Normative Values, Correlation with Demographic Determinants and Reliability of Three Different Methods of Volumetry.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- IGST Combined with Conventional Drug Therapy and TCM Therapy for Treatment of Bilateral Vestibular Hypofunction.Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Neurofibromatosis type 2 is a neurogenetic disorder with an incidence of about 1:33.000. Hallmarks are bilateral benign vestibular schwannomas, which can lead to deafness or brainstem compression. Volumetric tumor measurements are essential to assess the efficacy of new therapies. We present a statistical and methodical comparison of three volumetric image analysis tools. We performed volumetric measurements on phantoms with predefined volumes (0.1 to 8.0 ml) and tumors seen on 32 head MRI scans from eight NF2 patients with BrainLab, ITK-Snap, or OsiriX. The software was compared with regard to accuracy and reproducibility of the measurements and time required for analysis. The mean volume estimated by all three software programs differed significantly from the true volume of the phantoms, but OsiriX and BrainLab gave estimates that were not significantly different from each other. For the actual tumors, the estimated volumes with all three software tools showed a low coefficient of variability, but the mean volume estimates differed among the tools. OsiriX showed the shortest analysis time. Volumetric assessment of MRI images is associated to an intrinsic risk of miscalculation. For precise volumes it is mandatory to use the same volumetric tools for all measurements.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.