Literature DB >> 19547983

Differentiating high-grade from low-grade chondrosarcoma with MR imaging.

Hye Jin Yoo1, Sung Hwan Hong, Ja-Young Choi, Kyung Chul Moon, Han-Soo Kim, Jung-Ah Choi, Heung Sik Kang.   

Abstract

The purpose of the study was to evaluate theMR imaging features that differentiate between low-grade chondrosarcoma (LGCS) and high-grade chondrosarcoma (HGCS) and to determine the most reliable predictors for differentiation. MR images of 42 pathologically proven chondrosarcomas (28 LGCS and 14 HGCS) were retrospectively reviewed. There were 13 male and 29 female patients with an age range of 23–72 years (average age 51 years). On MR images, signal intensity, specific morphological characteristics including entrapped fat, internal lobular architecture, and outer lobular margin, soft tissue mass formation and contrast enhancement pattern were analysed. MR imaging features used to identify LGCS and HGCS were compared using univariate analysis and multivariate stepwise logistic regression analysis. On T1-weighted images, a central area of high signal intensity, which was not seen in LGCS, was frequently observed in HGCS (n = 5, 36%) (p<0.01). Entrapped fat within the tumour was commonly seen in LGCS (n = 26, 93%), but not in HGCS (n = 1, 4%) (p<0.01). LGCS more commonly (n = 24, 86%) preserved the characteristic internal lobular structures within the tumour than HGCSs (n = 4, 29%) (p<0.01). Soft tissue formation was more frequently observed in HGCS (n = 11, 79%) than in LGCS (n = 1, 4%) (p<0.01). On gadolinium-enhanced images, large central nonenhancing areas were exhibited in only two (7.1%) of LGCS, while HGCS frequently (n = 9, 64%) had a central nonenhancing portion (p<0.01). Results of multivariate stepwise logistic regression analysis showed that soft tissue formation and entrapped fat within the tumour were the variables that could be used to independently differentiate LGCS from HGCS. There were several MR imaging features of chondrosarcoma that could be helpful in distinguishing HGCS from LGCS.Among them, soft tissue mass formation favoured the diagnosis of HGCS, and entrapped fat within the tumour was highly indicative of LGCS.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19547983     DOI: 10.1007/s00330-009-1493-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Radiol        ISSN: 0938-7994            Impact factor:   5.315


  23 in total

1.  Morphological typing of chondrosarcoma: a study of 94 cases.

Authors:  H Welkerling; T Dreyer; G Delling
Journal:  Virchows Arch A Pathol Anat Histopathol       Date:  1991

Review 2.  Clinicopathological features, diagnosis, and treatment of adamantinoma of the long bones.

Authors:  Panayiotis J Papagelopoulos; Andreas F Mavrogenis; Evanthia C Galanis; Olga D Savvidou; Carrie Y Inwards; Franklin H Sim
Journal:  Orthopedics       Date:  2007-03       Impact factor: 1.390

3.  Chondrosarcoma: MR imaging with pathologic correlation.

Authors:  D G Varma; A G Ayala; C H Carrasco; S Q Guo; R Kumar; J Edeiken
Journal:  Radiographics       Date:  1992-07       Impact factor: 5.333

4.  MR of enchondroma and chondrosarcoma: rings and arcs of Gd-DTPA enhancement.

Authors:  J Aoki; S Sone; F Fujioka; K Terayama; K Ishii; O Karakida; S Imai; F Sakai; Y Imai
Journal:  J Comput Assist Tomogr       Date:  1991 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 1.826

5.  Magnetic resonance imaging of cartilaginous tumors: is it useful or necessary?

Authors:  L H De Beuckeleer; A M De Schepper; F Ramon
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  1996-02       Impact factor: 2.199

6.  No improvement in the overall survival of 194 patients with chondrosarcoma in Finland in 1971-1990.

Authors:  Mirva Söderström; Tauno O Ekfors; Tom O Böhling; Lyly H I Teppo; Eero I Vuorio; Hannu T Aro
Journal:  Acta Orthop Scand       Date:  2003-06

7.  The diagnosis and grading of chondrosarcoma of bone: a combined cytologic and histologic approach.

Authors:  N G Sanerkin
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  1980-02       Impact factor: 6.860

8.  Hyaline cartilage-origin bone and soft-tissue neoplasms: MR appearance and histologic correlation.

Authors:  E K Cohen; H Y Kressel; T S Frank; M Fallon; D L Burk; M K Dalinka; M L Schiebler
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1988-05       Impact factor: 11.105

9.  [Histologic grading of chondrosarcoma. A qualitative and quantitative analysis of 74 cases of the Hamburg bone tumor register].

Authors:  H Welkerling; M Werner; G Delling
Journal:  Pathologe       Date:  1996-01       Impact factor: 1.011

10.  Enchondroma versus chondrosarcoma in the appendicular skeleton: differentiating features.

Authors:  M D Murphey; D J Flemming; S R Boyea; J A Bojescul; D E Sweet; H T Temple
Journal:  Radiographics       Date:  1998 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 5.333

View more
  16 in total

Review 1.  CORR ® Tumor Board: Do Orthopaedic Oncologists Agree on the Diagnosis and Treatment of Cartilage Tumors of the Appendicular Skeleton?

Authors:  Megan E Anderson; Jim S Wu; Sara O Vargas
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2017-06-06       Impact factor: 4.176

2.  MRI differentiation of low-grade from high-grade appendicular chondrosarcoma.

Authors:  Hassan Douis; Leanne Singh; Asif Saifuddin
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2013-09-10       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 3.  The imaging of cartilaginous bone tumours. II. Chondrosarcoma.

Authors:  H Douis; A Saifuddin
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  2012-10-04       Impact factor: 2.199

4.  Is there a role for diffusion-weighted MRI (DWI) in the diagnosis of central cartilage tumors?

Authors:  H Douis; L Jeys; R Grimer; S Vaiyapuri; A M Davies
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  2015-03-07       Impact factor: 2.199

5.  What are the differentiating clinical and MRI-features of enchondromas from low-grade chondrosarcomas?

Authors:  Hassan Douis; M Parry; S Vaiyapuri; A M Davies
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2017-07-10       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 6.  Musculoskeletal tumours and tumour-like conditions: common and avoidable pitfalls at imaging in patients with known or suspected cancer: Part B: malignant mimics of benign tumours.

Authors:  Gary Ulaner; Sinchun Hwang; Jonathan Landa; Robert A Lefkowitz; David M Panicek
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2013-02-17       Impact factor: 3.075

7.  Chondrosarcoma of the para-acetabulum: correlation of imaging features with histopathological grade.

Authors:  Yanqing Kang; Weiwei Yuan; Xiaoyi Ding; Guangbin Wang
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2016-08-23       Impact factor: 3.469

8.  Magnetic resonance imaging follow-up of chondroid tumors: regression vs. progression.

Authors:  Bo Mi Chung; Sung Hwan Hong; Hye Jin Yoo; Ja-Young Choi; Hee-Dong Chae; Dong Hyun Kim
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  2017-12-03       Impact factor: 2.199

Review 9.  Update on the imaging features of the enchondromatosis syndromes.

Authors:  Ban Sharif; Daniel Lindsay; Asif Saifuddin
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  2021-07-24       Impact factor: 2.199

10.  Surgical treatment of central grade 1 chondrosarcoma of the appendicular skeleton.

Authors:  Domenico Andrea Campanacci; Guido Scoccianti; Alessandro Franchi; Giuliana Roselli; Giovanni Beltrami; Massimiliano Ippolito; Giuseppe Caff; Filippo Frenos; Rodolfo Capanna
Journal:  J Orthop Traumatol       Date:  2013-03-06
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.