Literature DB >> 27430436

Neuroimaging of spine tumors.

Nandor K Pinter1, Thomas J Pfiffner1, Laszlo L Mechtler2.   

Abstract

Intramedullary, intradural/extramedullary, and extradural spine tumors comprise a wide range of neoplasms with an even wider range of clinical symptoms and prognostic features. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), commonly used to evaluate the spine in patients presenting with pain, can further characterize lesions that may be encountered on other imaging studies, such as bone scintigraphy or computed tomography (CT). The advantage of the MRI is its multiplane capabilities, superior contrast agent resolution, and flexible protocols that play an important role in assessing tumor location, extent in directing biopsy, in planning proper therapy, and in evaluating therapeutic results. A multimodality approach can be used to fully characterize the lesion and the combination of information obtained from the different modalities usually narrows the diagnostic possibilities significantly. The diagnosis of spinal tumors is based on patient age, topographic features of the tumor, and lesion pattern, as seen at CT and MRI. The shift to high-end imaging incorporating diffusion-weighted imaging, diffusion tensor imaging, magnetic resonance spectroscopy, whole-body short tau inversion recovery, positron emission tomography, intraoperative and high-field MRI as part of the mainstream clinical imaging protocol has provided neurologists, neuro-oncologists, and neurosurgeons a window of opportunity to assess the biologic behavior of spine neoplasms. This chapter reviews neuroimaging of spine tumors, primary and secondary, discussing routine and newer modalities that can reduce the significant morbidity associated with these neoplasms.
© 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  CT; MRI; astrocytoma; chordoma; ependymoma; hemangioblastoma; meningioma; metastatic spine tumors; nerve sheath tumors; plasmacytoma; primary spinal tumors

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27430436     DOI: 10.1016/B978-0-444-53486-6.00033-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Handb Clin Neurol        ISSN: 0072-9752


  8 in total

Review 1.  Minimally invasive versus conventional spine surgery for vertebral metastases: a systematic review of the evidence.

Authors:  Zach Pennington; A Karim Ahmed; Camilo A Molina; Jeffrey Ehresman; Ilya Laufer; Daniel M Sciubba
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2018-03

2.  Assessment of paraspinal neurogenic tumors with diffusion-weighted MR imaging.

Authors:  Ahmed Abdel Khalek Abdel Razek; Germeen Albair Ashmalla
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2017-08-18       Impact factor: 3.134

3.  Editorial on Special Issue "Spine Imaging: Novel Image Acquisition Techniques and Analysis Tools".

Authors:  Nico Sollmann; Thomas Baum
Journal:  Diagnostics (Basel)       Date:  2022-06-01

Review 4.  Decision Making in Patients With Metastatic Spine. The Role of Minimally Invasive Treatment Modalities.

Authors:  Alfredo Conti; Güliz Acker; Anne Kluge; Franziska Loebel; Anita Kreimeier; Volker Budach; Peter Vajkoczy; Ilaria Ghetti; Antonino F Germano'; Carolin Senger
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2019-09-19       Impact factor: 6.244

Review 5.  Holistic Approach to the Diagnosis and Treatment of Patients with Tumor Metastases to the Spine.

Authors:  Hanna Nowak; Dominika Maria Szwacka; Monika Pater; Wojciech Krzysztof Mrugalski; Michał Grzegorz Milczarek; Magdalena Staniszewska; Roman Jankowski; Anna-Maria Barciszewska
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2022-07-18       Impact factor: 6.575

6.  Diagnosis of benign notochordal cell tumor of the spine: is a biopsy necessary?

Authors:  Satoshi Tateda; Ko Hashimoto; Toshimi Aizawa; Haruo Kanno; Shin Hitachi; Eiji Itoi; Hiroshi Ozawa
Journal:  Clin Case Rep       Date:  2017-11-24

7.  Full automation of spinal stereotactic radiosurgery and stereotactic body radiation therapy treatment planning using Varian Eclipse scripting.

Authors:  Jose R Teruel; Martha Malin; Elisa K Liu; Allison McCarthy; Kenneth Hu; Bejamin T Cooper; Erik P Sulman; Joshua S Silverman; David Barbee
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2020-09-23       Impact factor: 2.102

8.  Cervical Spine Inhomogeneously Enhancing Lesion: Avoiding Confirmation Bias.

Authors:  Federica Penner; Pietro Zeppa; Fabio Cofano; Andrea Bianconi; Marco Ajello; Francesco Zenga
Journal:  J Neurosci Rural Pract       Date:  2022-01-11
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.