E L Yuh1, S Jain Palrecha2, G M Lagemann3, M Kliot4, P R Weinstein5, N M Barbaro6, C T Chin7. 1. From the Departments of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging (E.L.Y., C.T.C.). 2. San Leandro Medical Center (S.J.P.), The Permanente Medical Group, San Leandro, California. 3. Department of Radiology (G.M.L.), University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. 4. Department of Neurosurgery (M.K.), Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois. 5. Neurological Surgery (P.R.W.), University of California at San Francisco, San Francisco, California. 6. Goodman Campbell Brain and Spine (N.M.B.) Department of Neurological Surgery (N.M.B.), Indiana University, Indianapolis, Indiana. 7. From the Departments of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging (E.L.Y., C.T.C.) cynthia.t.chin@ucsf.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Peripheral nerve disorders caused by benign and malignant primary nerve sheath tumors, infiltration or compression of nerves by metastatic disease, and postradiation neuritis demonstrate overlapping features on conventional MR imaging but require vastly different therapeutic approaches. We characterize and compare diffusivities of peripheral nerve lesions in patients undergoing MR neurography for peripheral neuropathy or brachial or lumbosacral plexopathy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-three patients, referred for MR neurography at our institution between 2003 and 2009 for a peripheral mononeuropathy or brachial or lumbosacral plexopathy and whose examinations included DWI, received a definitive diagnosis, based on biopsy results or clinical and imaging follow-up, for a masslike or infiltrative peripheral nerve or plexus lesion suspicious for tumor. Mean ADC values were determined within each lesion and compared across 3 groups (benign lesions, malignant lesions, and postradiation changes). RESULTS: Both ANOVA and Kruskal-Wallis tests demonstrated a statistically significant difference in ADC values across the 3 groups (P = .000023, P = .00056, respectively). Post hoc pair-wise comparisons showed that the ADC within malignant tumors differed significantly from that within benign tumors and postradiation changes. ADC within benign tumors and postradiation changes did not differ significantly from each other. CONCLUSIONS: DWI may be highly effective for the differentiation of benign from malignant peripheral nerve masslike or infiltrative lesions.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Peripheral nerve disorders caused by benign and malignant primary nerve sheath tumors, infiltration or compression of nerves by metastatic disease, and postradiation neuritis demonstrate overlapping features on conventional MR imaging but require vastly different therapeutic approaches. We characterize and compare diffusivities of peripheral nerve lesions in patients undergoing MR neurography for peripheral neuropathy or brachial or lumbosacral plexopathy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-three patients, referred for MR neurography at our institution between 2003 and 2009 for a peripheral mononeuropathy or brachial or lumbosacral plexopathy and whose examinations included DWI, received a definitive diagnosis, based on biopsy results or clinical and imaging follow-up, for a masslike or infiltrative peripheral nerve or plexus lesion suspicious for tumor. Mean ADC values were determined within each lesion and compared across 3 groups (benign lesions, malignant lesions, and postradiation changes). RESULTS: Both ANOVA and Kruskal-Wallis tests demonstrated a statistically significant difference in ADC values across the 3 groups (P = .000023, P = .00056, respectively). Post hoc pair-wise comparisons showed that the ADC within malignant tumors differed significantly from that within benign tumors and postradiation changes. ADC within benign tumors and postradiation changes did not differ significantly from each other. CONCLUSIONS: DWI may be highly effective for the differentiation of benign from malignant peripheral nerve masslike or infiltrative lesions.
Authors: A A K Abdel Razek; A Y Kandeel; N Soliman; H M El-shenshawy; Y Kamel; N Nada; A Denewar Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2007 Jun-Jul Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: A Chhabra; R S Thakkar; G Andreisek; M Chalian; A J Belzberg; J Blakeley; A Hoke; G K Thawait; J Eng; J A Carrino Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2012-11-01 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Francisco J Muniz Neto; Eduardo N Kihara Filho; Frederico C Miranda; Laercio A Rosemberg; Durval C B Santos; Atul K Taneja Journal: Biomed Res Int Date: 2018-01-31 Impact factor: 3.411