António P Matos1, Richard C Semelka2, Vasco Herédia3, Mamdoh AlObaidiy4, Filipe Veloso Gomes5, Miguel Ramalho1. 1. Department of Radiology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA, and Hospital Garcia de Orta, Almada, Portugal. 2. Department of Radiology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA. 3. Department of Radiology, Hospital do Espírito Santo, Évora, Portugal. 4. Department of Radiology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA, and King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. 5. Department of Radiology, Hospital de Faro, Portugal.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To describe a modified approach to the evaluation of adrenal nodules using a standard abdominal magnetic resonance imaging protocol. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Our sample comprised 149 subjects (collectively presenting with 132 adenomas and 40 nonadenomas). The adrenal signal intensity index was calculated. Lesions were grouped by pattern of enhancement (PE), according to the phase during which the wash-in peaked: arterial phase (type 1 PE); portal venous phase (type 2 PE); and interstitial phase (type 3 PE). The relative and absolute wash-out values were calculated. To test for mean differences between adenomas and nonadenomas, Student's t-tests were used. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis was also performed. RESULTS: The mean adrenal signal intensity index was significantly higher for the adenomas than for the nonadenomas (p < 0.0001). Chemical shift imaging showed a sensitivity and specificity of 94.4% and 100%, respectively, for differentiating adenomas from nonadenomas. Of the adenomas, 47.6%, 48.5%, and 3.9%, respectively, exhibited type 1, 2, and 3 PEs. For the mean wash-in proportions, significant differences were found among the enhancement patterns. The wash-out calculations revealed a trend toward better lesion differentiation for lesions exhibiting a type 1 PE, showing a sensitivity and specificity of 71.4% and 80.0%, respectively, when the absolute values were referenced, as well as for lesions exhibiting a type 2 PE, showing a sensitivity and specificity of 68.0% and 100%, respectively, when the relative values were referenced. The calculated probability of a lipid-poor lesion that exhibited a type 3 PE being a nonadenoma was > 99%. CONCLUSION: Subgrouping dynamic enhancement patterns yields high diagnostic accuracy in differentiating adenomas from nonadenomas.
OBJECTIVE: To describe a modified approach to the evaluation of adrenal nodules using a standard abdominal magnetic resonance imaging protocol. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Our sample comprised 149 subjects (collectively presenting with 132 adenomas and 40 nonadenomas). The adrenal signal intensity index was calculated. Lesions were grouped by pattern of enhancement (PE), according to the phase during which the wash-in peaked: arterial phase (type 1 PE); portal venous phase (type 2 PE); and interstitial phase (type 3 PE). The relative and absolute wash-out values were calculated. To test for mean differences between adenomas and nonadenomas, Student's t-tests were used. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis was also performed. RESULTS: The mean adrenal signal intensity index was significantly higher for the adenomas than for the nonadenomas (p < 0.0001). Chemical shift imaging showed a sensitivity and specificity of 94.4% and 100%, respectively, for differentiating adenomas from nonadenomas. Of the adenomas, 47.6%, 48.5%, and 3.9%, respectively, exhibited type 1, 2, and 3 PEs. For the mean wash-in proportions, significant differences were found among the enhancement patterns. The wash-out calculations revealed a trend toward better lesion differentiation for lesions exhibiting a type 1 PE, showing a sensitivity and specificity of 71.4% and 80.0%, respectively, when the absolute values were referenced, as well as for lesions exhibiting a type 2 PE, showing a sensitivity and specificity of 68.0% and 100%, respectively, when the relative values were referenced. The calculated probability of a lipid-poor lesion that exhibited a type 3 PE being a nonadenoma was > 99%. CONCLUSION: Subgrouping dynamic enhancement patterns yields high diagnostic accuracy in differentiating adenomas from nonadenomas.
Adrenal nodules are frequently encountered in daily clinical practice(. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is an established method for
the evaluation of adrenal lesions. Chemical-shift imaging (CSI) is an intracellular,
lipid-sensitive technique that has become the mainstay of MRI for the evaluation of
solid adrenal lesions(. CSI has high sensitivity and
specificity in the differentiation between malignant and benign lesions, because
benign lesions frequently have higher lipid content in patients without a history of
fatcontaining primary tumors(. Although the same rationale has
been utilized for unenhanced computed tomography (CT), MRI appears to be more
sensitive for the detection of low levels of intracytoplasmic lipids(. Nevertheless, 10-20% of benign adenomas are lipid-poor, and
there is substantial overlap between benign and malignant lesions in terms of their
appearance. Conversely, there are other lesions (benign and malignant) that exhibit
high lipid content and can mimic lipid-rich adenomas(.Several studies have suggested alternative strategies for facilitating the
characterization of adrenal masses on MRI. Similar to CT, delayed contrast-enhanced
imaging can be helpful in making that distinction(.
However, the use of contrast wash-out patterns on delayed images may not be
practical in MRI because of the long examination times required, including an
additional 15-min delayed acquisition.Some authors have shown the importance of early dynamic post-gadolinium contrast
evaluation. Many adrenal adenomas, irrespective of their lipid-content, have an
immediate homogenous capillary blush and rapid fading(,
features not observed for the majority of malignant lesions. Other investigators
have qualitatively or quantitatively evaluated the dynamic behavior of adrenal
lesions in post-gadolinium studies(, which allows a
more refined differential diagnosis.The purpose of our study was to describe a modified approach for evaluating adrenal
nodules using a standard abdominal MRI protocol, by categorizing adrenal lesion on
dynamic post-gadolinium acquisitions and integrating these results with CSI.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Our institutional review board approved this observational retrospective study. We
searched our institution's MRI reports database for cases of focal adrenal lesions
treated between January 2008 and December 2012. We identified a total of 262 lesions
in 223 consecutive subjects. Seventy-four subjects were excluded: because there was
not sufficient clinical/histological data to allow lesion characterization
(n = 4); because the lesion was homogeneously cystic
(n = 3); because the transverse or anteroposterior maximum
diameter of the lesion was less than 1 cm, which could result in partial volume
effects (n = 56); or because severe imaging artifacts were present
(n = 11). Therefore, the final sample comprised 149 subjects
(86 females and 63 males; mean age, 65 ± 13 years) collectively presenting
172 lesions (Figure 1). Of those 172 lesions,
132 (in 115 subjects) were categorized as adenomas: because the pathology report was
consistent with the diagnosis (n = 2); because the follow-up
findings showed that the lesion remained stable for more than 6 months, with less
than 10% variation in the maximum transverse diameter compared with previous
multidetector CT or MRI scans (n = 2); or because the lesion had an
adrenal signal intensity index (ASII) higher than 16.5%, there was no clinical or
imaging evidence of extra-adrenal primary neoplasia, and there was no clinical or
biochemical suspicion of pheochromocytoma (n = 128)(. Adenomas were further classified
as lipid-rich if the ASII was greater than 16.5%(. A total of 40 lesions (in 34 subjects) were categorized as
nonadenomas: 24 (in 18 subjects) were metastases; 7 (in as many subjects) were
myelolipomas; 6 (in as many subjects) were pheochromocytomas; 2 (in as many
subjects) were adrenal carcinomas; and 1 was an adrenal oncocytoma. The diagnosis of
metastasis was established in subjects with a history of neoplasia, together with a
de novo adrenal finding (n = 7), growth (more
than 10% variation in size) on followup imaging (n = 13), a
response to chemotherapy (n = 2), or histopathological confirmation
(n = 2). The sites of the primary neoplasms are shown in Table 1.
Figure 1
Flowchart providing information about the method of patient recruitment
and the number of patients who underwent chemical-shift imaging and
dynamic contrast-enhanced evaluation. Data in parentheses indicate the
number of lesions.
Table 1
Primary origin of metastases.
Site/type of lesion
N
(n)
Lung
Small cell carcinoma
1
(3)
Adenocarcinoma
2
(3)
Squamous adenocarcinoma
1
(1)
Undifferentiated non-small cell carcinoma
1
(1)
Colon adenocarcinoma
2
(3)
Renal cell carcinoma (clear cell subtype)
2
(3)
Hepatocellular carcinoma
1
(1)
Stomach adenocarcinoma
1
(1)
Cholangiocarcinoma
1
(1)
Melanoma
1
(1)
Uterine leiomyosarcoma
1
(1)
Liposarcoma
1
(1)
Non-Hodgkin lymphoma
1
(1)
Adenocarcinoma of unknown origin
2
(3)
N, number of patients; (n), number of
lesions.
Flowchart providing information about the method of patient recruitment
and the number of patients who underwent chemical-shift imaging and
dynamic contrast-enhanced evaluation. Data in parentheses indicate the
number of lesions.Primary origin of metastases.N, number of patients; (n), number of
lesions.The seven myelolipomas were so classified because their fat content approached that
of adjacent retroperitoneal fat, as shown on T1- and T2-weighted images with and
without fat suppression. The myelolipomas were excluded from the ASII analysis and
were included only in the dynamic postcontrast evaluation. Five of the six
pheochromocytomas were surgically removed. In one subject, the diagnosis of
pheochromocytoma was based on the typical clinical presentation and an elevated
plasma level of metanephrine(.
The two subjects with adrenal carcinomas had unilateral adrenal lesions and
underwent surgery. The adrenal oncocytoma was diagnosed histologically following an
adrenalectomy.Of the 172 lesions in the final sample, 157 (126 adenomas and 31 nonadenomas) were
considered in the CSI analysis. We excluded seven myelolipomas, one adenoma, and two
metastases of renal cell carcinoma, the last because of severe image artifacts on
CSI sequences.In the dynamic post-contrast analysis, we included 142 lesions: 103 adenomas and 39
nonadenomas. Twenty-nine adenomas were excluded for the following reasons: severe
images artifacts (n = 3); non-use of intravenous gadolinium
(n = 17); and suboptimal arterial phase of imaging
(n = 9). One metastasis (uterine leiomyosarcoma) was excluded
due to the absence of dynamic evaluation.
MRI technique
All subjects underwent MRI of the abdomen with a 1.5-T system (GE-Signa HDx; GE
Healthcare, Waukesha, WI, USA) using a phased-array torso coil.As part of our standard abdominal MRI protocol, the following sequences were
performed: axial unenhanced twodimensional (2D) gradient-echo T1-weighted
dual-echo inphase (repetition time/echo time [TR/TE] of 125/4.3 ms, 80° flip
angle) and out-of-phase (125/2.1, 80° flip angle); coronal half-Fourier
single-shot fast spin-echo T2-weighted (TR/TE of 1894.7/83.9 ms); axial
half-Fourier single-shot fast spin-echo T2-weighted (TR/TE of 1800/89.9 ms),
with and without fat suppression; and axial pre- and post-gadolinium
fat-suppressed 3D gradient-echo (TR/TE of 4.17/1.98 ms, 12° flip angle) during
the late arterial (also known as the hepatic arterial-dominant), portal venous,
and interstitial phases(.In all subjects, the contrast agent gadoterate meglumine (Dotarem; Guerbet,
Paris, France) was administered intravenously, with an automated power-injector
(Medrad, Pittsburgh, PA, USA), as a bolus of 0.1 mmol/kg at 2 mL/s, followed by
a bolus of 20 mL saline flush. The arterial postcontrast sequence was acquired
20 s after the initiation of contrast injection, compared with 60-80 s after for
the portal venous sequence and 3-4 min for the interstitial/equilibrium
sequences.
Image analysis
All quantitative measurements were performed by a single reader with eight years
of experience in reading MRI scans. For each lesion, we recorded the largest
diameter in the axial plane. For each lesion, the signal intensity (SI) was
obtained in all sequences from region-of-interest (ROI) measurements at the same
locations and at the same level. The ROI measurements were taken in a
homogeneous areas devoid of vessels, cystic/necrotic tissue, and artifacts. ROIs
were placed on each adrenal lesion to cover as much of the mass as possible,
avoiding the edges of the lesion(. To maintain the consistency of the ROI sampling among the
series, the reader used a copy and paste feature available on the workstation
employed. Occasionally, minor adjustments were needed to adjust the location,
but not the area, of the ROI.The ASII was calculated according to the following formula(:For the dynamic post-contrast evaluation, the lesions were clustered in three
groups, according to the pattern of enhancement (PE), based on the phase in
which the enhancement peaked. Type 1 PE was assigned to a lesion if the washin
peaked in the arterial phase and wash-out occurred during the subsequent phases.
Type 2 PE was assigned to a lesion if the wash-in peaked in the portal venous
phase and wash-out occurred during the interstitial phase. Type 3 PE was
assigned to a lesion if the enhancement was steady and progressive throughout
all phases, peaking in the interstitial phase.The modified relative wash-out and absolute wash-out were quantified for type 1
PE and type 2 PE lesions. The following formulas were used:where WO is the modified relative wash-out value;
WO is the absolute wash-out value;
a, i, and p are the SI values in the
arterial, interstitial, and portal venous phases of enhancement, respectively;
and u is the SI value for an unenhanced scan. The proportional wash-in was
calculated as follows:where WI is the wash-in value; x is the SI
value for a given phase (arterial, portal venous, or interstitial); and
u is the SI value for an unenhanced scan.
Statistical analysis
Student's t-tests for independent-samples were used in order to
test for mean differences between adenomas and nonadenomas in terms of lesion
diameters and maximum wash-in percentage, as well as the relative and absolute
washout rates. An F test for equal variances was used, and if p
< 0.05, a Welch test assuming unequal variances was performed.
P values were not adjusted for multiple comparisons. The
probability of type 1, 2, and 3 PE lesions being adenomas was calculated by
means of multiple event probability, as was that of type 1, 2, and 3 PE lesions
being lipid-poor adenomas. The latter was calculated for the prevalence in our
sample and for a hypothetical prevalence of 20% in the general
population(.Receiving operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was performed. An optimal
cut-off value to differentiate adenomas from other adrenal tumors was
calculated. That was defined as the value that produced the highest sum of
sensitivity and specificity in the identification of adenoma. In all cases,
values of p < 0.05 were considered to represent a
statistically significant difference.All statistical analyses were performed with MedCalc software for Windows,
version 11.3.0.0 (MedCalc Software, Mariakerke, Belgium).
RESULTS
The mean diameter of the adenomas and nonadenomas was 24.4 ± 8.2 mm (range,
13-58 mm) and 41.1 ± 24.4 mm (range, 13.8-109 mm), respectively, and the
difference was statistically significant (p < 0.001).The ROC analysis showed that a lesion diameter cut-off of 24.8 mm produced a
sensitivity and specificity of 70% and 63.6%, respectively (area under the curve
[AUC] = 0.729; 95% confidence interval [95% CI]: 0.628-0.831).The mean ASII of the adrenal adenomas was significantly higher than was that of the
nonadenomas (57.86 ± 20.96 vs. 2.60 ± 8.23; p <
0.0001). Of the 127 adenomas evaluated, 4 were considered lipid-poor (ASII ≤
16.5%). Of the 40 nonadenomas, only one (a metastasis of liposarcoma) met the
criteria for a lipid-rich adrenal nodule, with an ASII of 20.4%.The ROC analysis showed that an ASII cut-off of 20.4% produced a sensitivity and
specificity of 94.4% and 100%, respectively (AUC = 0.975; 95% CI: 0.936-0.993).
Using the classic cut-off of 16.5%, the sensitivity and specificity were both
96.8%.Figure 2 shows an adenoma in which the PE was
categorized as type 1. Among the 127 adenomas evaluated, the PE was categorized as
type 1 in 49 (47.6%), type 2 in 50 (48.5%), and type 3 in 4 (3.9%). The probability
of type 1, 2, and 3 PE lesions being adenomas was 90.9%, 77% and 17.4%,
respectively. Although the prevalence of lipid-poor adenomas in our study was low
(3.2%), the probability of type 1, 2, and 3 PE lesions being lipid-poor adenomas was
1.9%, 2.0%, and 0.2%, respectively (Figure 3).
Taking into consideration the fact that the reported prevalence of lipid-poor
adenomas identified by CT in the literature is 20%( and utilizing the calculated PEs described above, we found
that the probability would be 9.6%, 9.8%, and 0.8% for type 1, 2, and 3 PE lesions,
respectively. Among the 40 nonadenomas evaluated, the PE was categorized as type 1
in 5 (12.8%), type 2 in 15 (38.5%), and type 3 in 19 (48.7%).
Figure 2
Lipid-rich adenoma in a 66-year-old woman. Transverse, T1-weighted
in-phase (A, TR/TE of 125/4.3 ms, 80° flip angle) and
out-of-phase (B, TR/TE of 125/2.1 ms, 80° flip angle)
images of a right adrenal nodule that showed a signal drop in the
out-of-phase sequence. The adrenal index was 69%. Transverse,
T1-weighted three-dimensional gradient-echo MRI images with fat
suppression (TR/TE of 4.17/1.98 ms, 12° flip angle), obtained before
(C) and after gadolinium enhancement in the arterial
(D), portal venous (E), and interstitial
(F) phases, demonstrating a type 1 PE with a peak of
enhancement in the arterial phase.
Figure 3
Lipid-poor adenoma in a 46-year-old woman. Transverse, T1 weighted
in-phase (A, TR/TE of 125/4.3 ms, 80° flip angle) and
out-of-phase (B, TR/TE of 125/2.1 ms, 80° flip angle)
images of a well-circumscribed right adrenal nodule that did not show a
signal drop in the out-of-phase sequence. The adrenal index was -19.3%.
Transverse, fat-suppressed T1-weighted three-dimensional gradient-echo
MRI images with fat suppression (TR/TE of 4.17/1.98 ms, 12° flip angle)
obtained before (C) and after gadolinium enhancement in the
arterial (D), portal venous (E), and
interstitial (F) phases, demonstrating a type 2 PE with a
peak of enhancement in the portal venous phase. The lesion presented
long-term stability, which is consistent with a lipid-poor adrenal
adenoma.
Lipid-rich adenoma in a 66-year-old woman. Transverse, T1-weighted
in-phase (A, TR/TE of 125/4.3 ms, 80° flip angle) and
out-of-phase (B, TR/TE of 125/2.1 ms, 80° flip angle)
images of a right adrenal nodule that showed a signal drop in the
out-of-phase sequence. The adrenal index was 69%. Transverse,
T1-weighted three-dimensional gradient-echo MRI images with fat
suppression (TR/TE of 4.17/1.98 ms, 12° flip angle), obtained before
(C) and after gadolinium enhancement in the arterial
(D), portal venous (E), and interstitial
(F) phases, demonstrating a type 1 PE with a peak of
enhancement in the arterial phase.Lipid-poor adenoma in a 46-year-old woman. Transverse, T1 weighted
in-phase (A, TR/TE of 125/4.3 ms, 80° flip angle) and
out-of-phase (B, TR/TE of 125/2.1 ms, 80° flip angle)
images of a well-circumscribed right adrenal nodule that did not show a
signal drop in the out-of-phase sequence. The adrenal index was -19.3%.
Transverse, fat-suppressed T1-weighted three-dimensional gradient-echo
MRI images with fat suppression (TR/TE of 4.17/1.98 ms, 12° flip angle)
obtained before (C) and after gadolinium enhancement in the
arterial (D), portal venous (E), and
interstitial (F) phases, demonstrating a type 2 PE with a
peak of enhancement in the portal venous phase. The lesion presented
long-term stability, which is consistent with a lipid-poor adrenal
adenoma.For all PEs, significant differences for mean wash-in percentages were found between
adenomas and nonadenomas (Table 2). The
wash-in magnitude was significantly greater for adenomas with a type 2 or type 3 PE,
as well as for nonadenomas with a type 1 PE, although there was substantial overlap
between adenomas and nonadenomas.
Table 2
Quantitative data according to the enhancement pattern.
Type 1 PE
Type 2 PE
Type 3 PE
Evaluated parameters
Adenomas
Nonadenomas
p-value
Adenomas
Nonadenomas
p-value
Adenomas
Nonadenomas
p-value
Wash-in percentage
183.35 ± 55.82
240.12 ± 101.05
0.025
169.08 ± 43.56
110.52 ± 55.12
< 0.0001
157.76 ± 65.67
96.09 ± 47.98
0.0195
Absolute wash-out
42.28 ± 12.51
34.60 ± 8.41
0.1871
27.74 ± 11.06
18.50 ± 13.35
0.0088
Non-applicable
Non-applicable
Relative wash-out
26.94 ± 8.29
24.05 ± 7.98
0.4613
16.85 ± 6.28
8.41 ± 4.97
< 0.0001
Non-applicable
Non-applicable
Enhancement pattern
49 (47.6%)
5 (12.8%)
50 (48.5%)
15 (38.5%)
4 (3,9%)
19 (48.7%)
Note: Data are mean ± standard deviation.
Quantitative data according to the enhancement pattern.Note: Data are mean ± standard deviation.The results of the ROC curve analyses of relative and absolute wash-out values for
type 1 and type 2 PE lesions are shown in Table
3. For lesions presenting with a type 1 PE, there was a trend toward
better results in differentiating adenomas from nonadenomas when we used an absolute
washout cut-off value of 38.4%, which produced a sensitivity and specificity of
71.4% and 80%, respectively (AUC = 0.735; 95% CI: 0.597-0.846). Conversely, for
lesions presenting with a type 2 PE, the use of a relative wash-out cut-off value of
13.9% provided the best results, with a sensitivity and specificity of 68% and 100%,
respectively (AUC = 0.857; 95% CI: 0.748-0.932). Using the suggested wash-out
cut-off value of 13.9%, we found that, among the adrenal lesions presenting with a
type 2 PE, 16 were mischaracterized as nonadenomas and 33 were correctly
characterized as adenomas.
Table 3
Diagnostic utility of wash-out evaluation methods.
Evaluation method
AUC (95% CI)
Cut-off
Sensitivity
Specificity
Absolute wash-out
Type 1 PE
0.735 (0.597–0.846)
38.4%
71.4%
80%
Type 2 PE
0.721 (0.596–0.825)
23.3%
64%
80%
Relative wash-out
Type 1 PE
0.596 (0.454–0.727)
29.8%
38.8%
100%
Type 2 PE
0.857 (0.748–0.932)
13.9%
68%
100%
Diagnostic utility of wash-out evaluation methods.
DISCUSSION
CSI is recognized as the cornerstone of the MRI characterization of adrenal
lesions(. Our results show that CSI alone had a sensitivity
and specificity of 94.4% and 100%, respectively, when an ASII cut-off of 20.4% was
applied. However, some benign lesions have no significant lipid content, whereas
some nonadenomas display high lipid content, and our findings are in agreement with
those of previous reports(. To aid in this characterization,
we propose a modified approach to evaluating adrenal lesions when utilizing a
standard abdominal MRI protocol. Our study differs from other reports describing
contrast enhancement and wash-out of adrenal nodules( in that
we divided adrenal masses into three categories according to the phase during which
the wash-in peaked, using a standard post-gadolinium abdominal MRI protocol. Our
findings suggest that this categorization provides additional advantages to CSI for
the differentiation of adenomas from nonadenomas, especially for lesions with low
lipid content or in the presence of extra-adrenal primary tumors that may result in
lipid-rich adrenal metastases.One important observation in our study was that the vast majority of adrenal adenomas
(96.1%) showed a type 1 or type 2 PE (47.6% and 48.5%, respectively). In contrast,
the majority of nonadenomas showed a type 2 or type 3 PE (38.5% and 48.7%,
respectively).A type 1 PE was found to be strongly associated with a lesion being benign. Our
results show that the probability of a lesion with a type 1 PE being an adenoma was
90.9%. Chung et al.( and Foti
et al.( evaluated malignant
adrenal lesions and found that none exhibited the peak of enhancement in the
arterial phase. However, it is recognized that hypervascular nonadenomas, including
pheochromocytoma, metastases from hypervascular extra-adrenal primary malignancies
such as renal cell carcinoma or hepatocellular carcinoma, and primary adrenal
carcinomas, may show a type 1 PE(. In our study,
five nonadenomas (three pheochromocytomas, one adrenal carcinoma and one clear cell
renal carcinoma metastasis) showed a type 1 PE. Our results are in keeping with
reports suggesting that certain types of adrenal nonadenomas display arterial phase
wash-in, rendering them virtually indistinguishable from adenomas based on dynamic
contrast imaging(. A recent study
by Choi et al.( showed that
metastases from renal cell carcinoma and hepatocellular carcinoma can behave
similarly to adrenal adenomas in terms of the proportional enhancement and wash-out
attained in delayed contrast-enhanced CT studies. We believe that the adoption of an
absolute wash-out calculation may aid in differentiation, given that using an
absolute wash-out cut-off value of 38.4% provided acceptable sensitivity and
specificity (71.4% and 80%, respectively) in our study. Nevertheless, our findings
should be regarded with caution because our sample comprised a small number of
nonadenomas presenting with a type 1 PE. Our findings suggest that an adrenal mass
exhibiting a type 1 PE is very likely to be an adenoma if all of the following
criteria are met: the lesion is indeterminate for adenoma based on CSI; there is no
clinical or biochemical suspicion of pheochromocytoma; and there is no known history
or suspicion of hypervascular extra-adrenal primary tumor.Another important finding of our study was that type 3 PE was the most common type of
PE among the nonadenomas and was quite rare among the adenomas (identified in only
3.9%). Given the relatively low prevalence of lipid-poor adenomas, the probability
of a type 3 PE occurring in a lipid-poor adenoma compounds two unlikely events
(range, 0.2-0.8%). Therefore, an important observation is that the probability of a
lipid-poor lesion with a type 3 PE being a nonadenoma is greater than 99%. In the
present study, all adrenal adenomas showing a type 3 PE were, as expected,
lipid-rich adenomas. In one case, a metastasis of liposarcoma showed an ASII of
20.4% and a type 3 PE; which, if evaluated by CSI alone, would have been classified
as a lipid-rich adenoma( and considered benign. Our
opinion is that the presence of a type 3 PE, independent of the presence of fat on a
CSI scan, should raise the suspicion of a nonadenomatous lesion, especially in a
patient with a history of a primary extraadrenal neoplasm.A type 2 PE showed considerable overlap between adenomas and nonadenomas. The
wash-out ratio is usually higher for adenomas than for nonadenomas because benign
lesions tend to show steeper wash-out slope; that is, greater washout over a shorter
time(. Our
results show that applying a relative wash-out cut-off value of 13.9% provides a
clear separation between adenomas and nonadenomas included in the type 2 PE
category, with a sensitivity and specificity of 68% and 100%, respectively. Using
that cut-off value, both lipid-poor adenomas with a type 2 PE were correctly
characterized. We find it interesting that the relative wash-out calculation showed
better results than did the absolute washout for type 2 PE and vice versa for type 1
PE. The shorter time window of wash-out obtained with standard protocols, albeit
longer for lesions with a type 1 PE and shorter for lesions with a type 2 PE, could
explain these differences.Analogous to previous studies(, the present study demonstrated
considerable overlap in size between adenomas and nonadenomas. In our study, the
size criterion yielded a relatively low sensitivity and specificity to be accepted
as a discriminator per se. Likewise, there were significant differences between
adenomas and nonadenomas in terms of the mean wash-in proportion, although the
specificity values were less than acceptable because of the considerable degree of
overlap.Our observations are of clinical utility, because the diagnostic accuracy of adrenal
nodule evaluation does not depend on the calculation of extensive quantitative data
but rather only on the phase during which the peak of enhancement occurred. Our
findings support the possibility that the presence of intracytoplasmic lipid
identified by means of CSI continues to be the strongest indicator of benignity. In
the absence of intracytoplasmic lipid, a lesion presenting with a type 1 PE is very
likely to be an adenoma, whereas a lesion presenting with a type 3 PE is very likely
to be a nonadenoma. There was considerable overlap for lesions presenting with a
type 2 PE, and in our approach we suggest the choice of the relative wash-out
calculation as an additional tool to separate adenomas from nonadenomas.Our study has limitations. First is the fact that it was retrospective. However, this
is a circumstance commonly encountered, especially in a preliminary study.
Nevertheless, prospective studies could further validate our results and lead to the
development of an imaging clinical-decision algorithm integrating CSI and dynamic
contrast enhanced imaging. Another limitation is the relatively low prevalence of
lipid-poor adenomas in our consecutive population compared with those of previous
reports(. However, we believe that the PE
of lipid-poor adenomas should parallel that of lipidrich adenomas, corroborating our
results, particularly for the very unlikely event of identifying lipid-poor adenomas
with a type 3 PE. In addition, for most of the lesions considered adrenal adenomas,
we had no histological confirmation of the diagnosis, which is a limitation of
nearly all studies involving imaging of adrenal adenomas. The presence of
characteristic imaging features, follow-up stability, and the absence of known
extra-adrenal primary neoplasms render biopsy clinically unnecessary and ethically
unwarranted.In conclusion, we proposed a modified approach to the diagnosis of adrenal nodules
using a standard abdominal MRI protocol. Characteristic findings on CSI continue to
represent the strongest indicator of benignity. However, the categorization of
lesions based on dynamic PEs may yield high diagnostic accuracy in the
differentiation of adenomas from nonadenomas when diagnosis by CSI is not
possible.
Authors: Dieter H Szolar; Melvyn Korobkin; Pia Reittner; Andrea Berghold; Thomas Bauernhofer; Harald Trummer; Helmut Schoellnast; Klaus W Preidler; Hellmuth Samonigg Journal: Radiology Date: 2005-02 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Miguel Ramalho; Rafael O P de Campos; Vasco Heredia; Brian M Dale; Penampai Tannaphai; Rafael M Azevedo; Richard C Semelka Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2011-08 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Fernando Ide Yamauchi; George Ramos Lemos; André Dubinco; Omir Antunes Paiva; Thais Caldara Mussi; Ronaldo Hueb Baroni Journal: Int Braz J Urol Date: 2022 Mar-Apr Impact factor: 1.541