A D King1, L Y S Wong2, B K H Law2, K S Bhatia3, J K S Woo4, Q-Y Ai2, T Y Tan5, J Goh6, K L Chuah7, F K F Mo8, K C A Chan9, A T C Chan8, A C Vlantis4. 1. From the Departments of Imaging and Interventional Radiology (A.D.K., L.Y.S.W., B.K.H.L., Q.-Y.A.) king2015@cuhk.edu.hk. 2. From the Departments of Imaging and Interventional Radiology (A.D.K., L.Y.S.W., B.K.H.L., Q.-Y.A.). 3. Imaging Department (K.S.B.), St Mary's Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare, National Health Service Trust, London, UK. 4. Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery (J.K.S.W., A.C.V.). 5. Department of Radiology (T.Y.T.), Changi General Hospital, Singapore. 6. Departments of Diagnostic Radiology (J.G.). 7. Pathology (K.L.C.), Tan Tock Seng Hospital, Singapore. 8. Clinical Oncology (F.K.F.M., A.T.C.C.). 9. Department of Chemical Pathology (K.C.A.C.), State Key Laboratory in Oncology in South China, Li Ka Shing Institute of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Prince of Wales Hospital, Hong Kong, S.A.R., China.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: MR imaging can detect nasopharyngeal carcinoma that is hidden from endoscopic view, but for accurate detection carcinoma confined within the nasopharynx (stage T1) must be distinguished from benign hyperplasia of the nasopharynx. This study aimed to document the MR imaging features of stage T1 nasopharyngeal carcinoma and to attempt to identify features distinguishing it from benign hyperplasia. MATERIALS AND METHODS: MR images of 189 patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma confined to the nasopharynx and those of 144 patients with benign hyperplasia were reviewed and compared in this retrospective study. The center, volume, size asymmetry (maximum percentage difference in area between the right and left nasopharyngeal halves), signal intensity asymmetry, deep mucosal white line (greater contrast enhancement along the deep tumor margin), and absence/distortion of the adenoidal septa were evaluated. Differences were assessed with logistic regression and the χ2 test. RESULTS: The nasopharyngeal carcinoma center was lateral, central, or diffuse in 134/189 (70.9%), 25/189 (13.2%), and 30/189 (15.9%) cases, respectively. Nasopharyngeal carcinomas involving the walls showed that a deep mucosal white line was present in 180/183 (98.4%), with a focal loss of this line in 153/180 (85%) cases. Adenoidal septa were absent or distorted in 111/111 (100%) nasopharyngeal carcinomas involving the adenoid. Compared with benign hyperplasia, nasopharyngeal carcinoma had a significantly greater volume, size asymmetry, signal asymmetry, focal loss of the deep mucosal white line, and absence/distortion of the adenoidal septa (P < .001). Although size asymmetry was the most accurate criterion (89.5%) for nasopharyngeal carcinoma detection, use of this parameter alone would have missed 11.9% of early-stage T1 nasopharyngeal carcinomas. CONCLUSIONS: MR imaging features can help distinguish stage T1 nasopharyngeal carcinoma from benign hyperplasia in most cases.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: MR imaging can detect nasopharyngeal carcinoma that is hidden from endoscopic view, but for accurate detection carcinoma confined within the nasopharynx (stage T1) must be distinguished from benign hyperplasia of the nasopharynx. This study aimed to document the MR imaging features of stage T1 nasopharyngeal carcinoma and to attempt to identify features distinguishing it from benign hyperplasia. MATERIALS AND METHODS: MR images of 189 patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma confined to the nasopharynx and those of 144 patients with benign hyperplasia were reviewed and compared in this retrospective study. The center, volume, size asymmetry (maximum percentage difference in area between the right and left nasopharyngeal halves), signal intensity asymmetry, deep mucosal white line (greater contrast enhancement along the deep tumor margin), and absence/distortion of the adenoidal septa were evaluated. Differences were assessed with logistic regression and the χ2 test. RESULTS: The nasopharyngeal carcinoma center was lateral, central, or diffuse in 134/189 (70.9%), 25/189 (13.2%), and 30/189 (15.9%) cases, respectively. Nasopharyngeal carcinomas involving the walls showed that a deep mucosal white line was present in 180/183 (98.4%), with a focal loss of this line in 153/180 (85%) cases. Adenoidal septa were absent or distorted in 111/111 (100%) nasopharyngeal carcinomas involving the adenoid. Compared with benign hyperplasia, nasopharyngeal carcinoma had a significantly greater volume, size asymmetry, signal asymmetry, focal loss of the deep mucosal white line, and absence/distortion of the adenoidal septa (P < .001). Although size asymmetry was the most accurate criterion (89.5%) for nasopharyngeal carcinoma detection, use of this parameter alone would have missed 11.9% of early-stage T1 nasopharyngeal carcinomas. CONCLUSIONS: MR imaging features can help distinguish stage T1 nasopharyngeal carcinoma from benign hyperplasia in most cases.
Authors: Sing-Fai Leung; John S Tam; Anthony T C Chan; Benny Zee; Lisa Y S Chan; Dolly P Huang; Andrew Van Hasselt; Philip J Johnson; Y M Dennis Lo Journal: Clin Chem Date: 2003-12-18 Impact factor: 8.327
Authors: A D King; A C Vlantis; R K Y Tsang; T M K Gary; A K Y Au; C Y Chan; S Y Kok; W T Kwok; H K Lui; A T Ahuja Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2006 Jun-Jul Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: K C Allen Chan; John K S Woo; Ann King; Benny C Y Zee; W K Jacky Lam; Stephen L Chan; Sam W I Chu; Constance Mak; Irene O L Tse; Samantha Y M Leung; Gloria Chan; Edwin P Hui; Brigette B Y Ma; Rossa W K Chiu; Sing-Fai Leung; Andrew C van Hasselt; Anthony T C Chan; Y M Dennis Lo Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2017-08-10 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: J Y Yu; D Zhang; X L Huang; J Ma; C Yang; X J Li; H Xiong; B Zhou; R K Liao; Z Y Tang Journal: J Med Syst Date: 2020-02-26 Impact factor: 4.460
Authors: Qi-Yong Ai; Ann D King; Janet S M Chan; Weitian Chen; K C Allen Chan; John K S Woo; Benny C Y Zee; Anthony T C Chan; Darren M C Poon; Brigette B Y Ma; Edwin P Hui; Anil T Ahuja; Alexander C Vlantis; Jing Yuan Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2019-03-22 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: A D King; J K S Woo; Q-Y Ai; F K F Mo; T Y So; W K J Lam; I O L Tse; A C Vlantis; K W N Yip; E P Hui; B B Y Ma; R W K Chiu; A T C Chan; Y M D Lo; K C A Chan Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2020-03 Impact factor: 3.825