Ruchi S Patni1, Deb K Boruah2,3, Shantiranjan Sanyal4, Bidyut B Gogoi5, Maninder Patni6, Rosy Khandelia7, Nripen Gogoi1. 1. Department of Radio-diagnosis, Assam Medical College, Dibrugarh, Assam, India. 2. Department of Radio-diagnosis, Assam Medical College, Dibrugarh, Assam, India. drdeb_rad@yahoo.co.in. 3. M-Lane, RCC-4, Assam Medical College Campus, Dibrugarh, Assam, 786002, India. drdeb_rad@yahoo.co.in. 4. Consultant Radiologist, Airedale General Hospital, West Yorkshire, UK. 5. Department of Pathology, NEIGHRMS, Shillong, Meghalaya, India. 6. Department of Anesthesiology, Geetanjali Medical College, Udaipur, Rajasthan, India. 7. Department of Pathology, Assam Medical College, Dibrugarh, Assam, India.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the role of multi-voxel proton MR spectroscopy in differentiating benign and malignant musculoskeletal tumours in a more objective way and to correlate the MRS data parameters with histopathology. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A hospital-based prospective study was carried out comprising 42 patients who underwent MRI examinations from 1 July 2013 to 30 June 2014. After routine sequences, single-slice multi-voxel proton MR spectroscopy was included at TE-135 using the PRESS sequence. The voxel with the maximum choline/Cr ratio was used for analysis of data in 32 patients. The strength of association between the MR spectroscopy findings and the nature of tumour and histopathological grading were assessed. RESULTS: Of the 42 patients, the MR spectra were not of diagnostic quality in 10. In the remaining 32 patients, 12 (37.5%) had benign and 20 (62.5%) malignant tumours. The mean choline/Cr ratio was 6.97 ± 5.95 (SD) for benign tumours and 25.39 ± 17.72 (SD) for malignant tumours. In our study statistical significance was noted between the choline/Cr ratio and the histological nature of musculoskeletal tumours (p = 0.002) assessed by unpaired t-test. The choline/Cr ratio and histological grading were also found to be significant (p = 0.001) when assessed by one-way ANOVA test. CONCLUSIONS: Multi-voxel MR spectroscopy showed a higher choline/Cr ratio in malignant musculoskeletal tumours than in benign ones (p = 0.002). The choline/Cr ratio and histological grading of musculoskeletal tumours also showed statistical significance (p = 0.001).
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the role of multi-voxel proton MR spectroscopy in differentiating benign and malignant musculoskeletal tumours in a more objective way and to correlate the MRS data parameters with histopathology. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A hospital-based prospective study was carried out comprising 42 patients who underwent MRI examinations from 1 July 2013 to 30 June 2014. After routine sequences, single-slice multi-voxel proton MR spectroscopy was included at TE-135 using the PRESS sequence. The voxel with the maximum choline/Cr ratio was used for analysis of data in 32 patients. The strength of association between the MR spectroscopy findings and the nature of tumour and histopathological grading were assessed. RESULTS: Of the 42 patients, the MR spectra were not of diagnostic quality in 10. In the remaining 32 patients, 12 (37.5%) had benign and 20 (62.5%) malignant tumours. The mean choline/Cr ratio was 6.97 ± 5.95 (SD) for benign tumours and 25.39 ± 17.72 (SD) for malignant tumours. In our study statistical significance was noted between the choline/Cr ratio and the histological nature of musculoskeletal tumours (p = 0.002) assessed by unpaired t-test. The choline/Cr ratio and histological grading were also found to be significant (p = 0.001) when assessed by one-way ANOVA test. CONCLUSIONS: Multi-voxel MR spectroscopy showed a higher choline/Cr ratio in malignant musculoskeletal tumours than in benign ones (p = 0.002). The choline/Cr ratio and histological grading of musculoskeletal tumours also showed statistical significance (p = 0.001).
Entities:
Keywords:
Choline/creatine ratio; Histopathology (HPE); Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI); Proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy (1H-MRS)
Authors: F Russo; S Mazzetti; G Grignani; G De Rosa; M Aglietta; G C Anselmetti; M Stasi; D Regge Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2011-12-04 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Ty K Subhawong; Xin Wang; Daniel J Durand; Michael A Jacobs; John A Carrino; Antonio J Machado; Laura M Fayad Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2012-01 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Laura M Fayad; Xin Wang; Nouha Salibi; Peter B Barker; Michael A Jacobs; Antonio J Machado; Kristy L Weber; David A Bluemke Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2010-07 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Laura M Fayad; David A Bluemke; Edward F McCarthy; Kristin L Weber; Peter B Barker; Michael A Jacobs Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2006-01 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Sina Meisamy; Patrick J Bolan; Eva H Baker; Robin L Bliss; Evin Gulbahce; Lenore I Everson; Michael T Nelson; Tim H Emory; Todd M Tuttle; Douglas Yee; Michael Garwood Journal: Radiology Date: 2004-11 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: H G Krouwer; T A Kim; S D Rand; R W Prost; V M Haughton; K C Ho; S S Jaradeh; G A Meyer; K A Blindauer; J F Cusick; G L Morris; P R Walsh Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 1998-10 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Amani Arthur; Edward W Johnston; Jessica M Winfield; Matthew D Blackledge; Robin L Jones; Paul H Huang; Christina Messiou Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2022-07-01 Impact factor: 5.738