OBJECTIVE: The relative utility of various preoperative diagnostic imaging modalities, including PET (utilizing FDG and FMT), CT, and MR imaging, for evaluation of lipoma and liposarcoma, especially well-differentiated liposarcoma, was investigated. METHODS: Imaging findings in 32 patients with histopathologically documented lipoma, including one with fibrolipoma and one with angiolipoma, and 25 patients with liposarcomas whose subtypes included 10 well-differentiated, 10 myxoid, and 5 other types were reviewed retrospectively. Pre-operative imaging included FDG-PET (n = 44), FMT-PET (n = 21), CT (n = 25), and MR imaging (n = 53). RESULTS: Statistically significant imaging features of MR images favoring a diagnosis of liposarcoma involved lesions containing less than 75% fat (p < 0.001) as well as the presence of septa (p < 0.001). As compared with well-differentiated liposarcoma, benign lesions were differentiated significantly only by the presence of septa (p < 0.001), which also provided significant differentiation on CT (p < 0.05). The mean SUVs for malignant tumors were significantly higher than those for benign lesions in both FDG- and FMT-PET analyses (p < 0.0001, p = 0.0011, respectively). By using a cut-off value for FDG- and FMT-PET set at 0.81 and 1.0 respectively, which provided the highest accuracy, benign lesions were differentiated significantly from liposarcomas (p < 0.001, and p < 0.02). Furthermore, benign tumors and the three subtypes of liposarcoma were divided significantly into four biological grades by FDG- and FMT-accumulation rates (rho = 0.793, p < 0.0001; and rho = 0.745, p = 0.0009, respectively). A cut-off value of 0.81 for FDG-PET provided significant differentiation between benign lesions and well-differentiated liposarcoma (p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The presence of septa on MR images differentiated lipomas from liposarcoma, even well-differentiated type. PET analysis, especially FDG-PET, quantitatively provided not only the differentiation but also the metabolic separation among subtypes of liposarcoma. Interpretation of the visual diagnostic modalities requires extensive experience and carries a risk of ignoring a critical portion of malignancy. PET metabolic imaging may be an objective and useful modality for evaluating adipose tissue tumors preoperatively.
OBJECTIVE: The relative utility of various preoperative diagnostic imaging modalities, including PET (utilizing FDG and FMT), CT, and MR imaging, for evaluation of lipoma and liposarcoma, especially well-differentiated liposarcoma, was investigated. METHODS: Imaging findings in 32 patients with histopathologically documented lipoma, including one with fibrolipoma and one with angiolipoma, and 25 patients with liposarcomas whose subtypes included 10 well-differentiated, 10 myxoid, and 5 other types were reviewed retrospectively. Pre-operative imaging included FDG-PET (n = 44), FMT-PET (n = 21), CT (n = 25), and MR imaging (n = 53). RESULTS: Statistically significant imaging features of MR images favoring a diagnosis of liposarcoma involved lesions containing less than 75% fat (p < 0.001) as well as the presence of septa (p < 0.001). As compared with well-differentiated liposarcoma, benign lesions were differentiated significantly only by the presence of septa (p < 0.001), which also provided significant differentiation on CT (p < 0.05). The mean SUVs for malignant tumors were significantly higher than those for benign lesions in both FDG- and FMT-PET analyses (p < 0.0001, p = 0.0011, respectively). By using a cut-off value for FDG- and FMT-PET set at 0.81 and 1.0 respectively, which provided the highest accuracy, benign lesions were differentiated significantly from liposarcomas (p < 0.001, and p < 0.02). Furthermore, benign tumors and the three subtypes of liposarcoma were divided significantly into four biological grades by FDG- and FMT-accumulation rates (rho = 0.793, p < 0.0001; and rho = 0.745, p = 0.0009, respectively). A cut-off value of 0.81 for FDG-PET provided significant differentiation between benign lesions and well-differentiated liposarcoma (p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The presence of septa on MR images differentiated lipomas from liposarcoma, even well-differentiated type. PET analysis, especially FDG-PET, quantitatively provided not only the differentiation but also the metabolic separation among subtypes of liposarcoma. Interpretation of the visual diagnostic modalities requires extensive experience and carries a risk of ignoring a critical portion of malignancy. PET metabolic imaging may be an objective and useful modality for evaluating adipose tissue tumors preoperatively.
Authors: Eelco de Bree; Alexander Karatzanis; Jennifer L Hunt; Primož Strojan; Alessandra Rinaldo; Robert P Takes; Alfio Ferlito; Remco de Bree Journal: Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol Date: 2014-05-07 Impact factor: 2.503
Authors: Elba C Etchebehere; Brian P Hobbs; Denái R Milton; Osama Malawi; Shreyaskumar Patel; Robert S Benjamin; Homer A Macapinlac Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2015-12-03 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Manaf H Younis; Hasan A Abu-Hijleh; Osama O Aldahamsheh; Abdulrahman Abualruz; Lukman Thalib Journal: Med Princ Pract Date: 2019-12-31 Impact factor: 1.927