RESUMEN
Objective@#: Decompressive craniectomy (DC) with duroplasty is one of the common surgical treatments for life-threatening increased intracranial pressure (ICP). Once ICP is controlled, cranioplasty (CP) with reinsertion of the cryopreserved autologous bone flap or a synthetic implant is considered for protection and esthetics. Although with the risk of autologous bone flap resorption (BFR), cryopreserved autologous bone flap for CP is one of the important material due to its cost effectiveness. In this article, we performed conventional statistical analysis and the machine learning technique understand the risk factors for BFR. @*Methods@#: Patients aged >18 years who underwent autologous bone CP between January 2015 and December 2021 were reviewed. Demographic data, medical records, and volumetric measurements of the autologous bone flap volume from 94 patients were collected. BFR was defined with absolute quantitative method (BFR-A) and relative quantitative method (BFR%). Conventional statistical analysis and random forest with hyper-ensemble approach (RF with HEA) was performed. And overlapped partial dependence plots (PDP) were generated. @*Results@#: Conventional statistical analysis showed that only the initial autologous bone flap volume was statistically significant on BFR-A. RF with HEA showed that the initial autologous bone flap volume, interval between DC and CP, and bone quality were the factors with most contribution to BFR-A, while, trauma, bone quality, and initial autologous bone flap volume were the factors with most contribution to BFR%. Overlapped PDPs of the initial autologous bone flap volume on the BRF-A crossed at approximately 60 mL, and a relatively clear separation was found between the non-BFR and BFR groups. Therefore, the initial autologous bone flap of over 60 mL could be a possible risk factor for BFR. @*Conclusion@#: From the present study, BFR in patients who underwent CP with autologous bone flap might be inevitable. However, the degree of BFR may differ from one to another. Therefore, considering artificial bone flaps as implants for patients with large DC could be reasonable. Still, the risk factors for BFR are not clearly understood. Therefore, chronological analysis and pathophysiologic studies are needed.
RESUMEN
Purpose@#The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of prostate volume estimates calculated from the ellipsoid formula using the anteroposterior (AP) diameter measured on axial and sagittal images obtained through ultrasonography (US) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). @*Methods@#This retrospective study included 456 patients with transrectal US and MRI from two university hospitals. Two radiologists independently measured the prostate gland diameters on US and MRI: AP diameters on axial and sagittal images, transverse, and longitudinal diameters on midsagittal images. The volume estimates, volumeax and volumesag, were calculated from the ellipsoid formula by using the AP diameter on axial and sagittal images, respectively. The prostate volume extracted from MRI-based whole-gland segmentation was considered the gold standard. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was used to evaluate the inter-method agreement between volumeax and volumesag, and agreement with the gold standard. The Wilcoxon signedrank test was used to analyze the differences between the volume estimates and the gold standard. @*Results@#The prostate gland volume estimates showed excellent inter-method agreement, and excellent agreement with the gold standard (ICCs >0.9). Compared with the gold standard, the volume estimates were significantly larger on MRI and significantly smaller on US (P<0.001). The volume difference (segmented volume–volume estimate) was greater in patients with larger prostate glands, especially on US. @*Conclusion@#Volumeax and volumesag showed excellent inter-method agreement and excellent agreement with the gold standard on both US and MRI. However, prostate volume was overestimated on MRI and underestimated on US.