4.4 Article

Whole-body magnetic resonance imaging for staging Langerhans cell histiocytosis in children and young adults

Journal

PEDIATRIC BLOOD & CANCER
Volume 70, Issue 2, Pages -

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/pbc.30064

Keywords

LCH; skeletal survey; staging; WB-MRI; x-ray

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study compares the efficacy of whole-body magnetic resonance imaging (WB-MRI) and radiographic skeletal survey (R-SS) in the initial staging of Langerhans cell histiocytosis (LCH). The results show that WB-MRI has a higher accuracy in identifying skeletal lesions compared to R-SS, however, clinical and radiology expertise is required to avoid upstaging and overtreatment.
Introduction Radiographic skeletal survey (R-SS) is the standard imaging technique for the initial staging of Langerhans cell histiocytosis (LCH). Whole-body magnetic resonance imaging (WB-MRI) has been proposed as an effective, radiation-free alternative. Methods We prospectively assessed patients with LCH followed at three tertiary centers in Italy and Austria. Two national study protocols were independently designed, and data were then pooled to increase the power of their findings. R-SS and WB-MRI were performed at diagnosis and repeated at the follow-up to confirm the nature of the identified lesions and to study their evolution. Results Data from 67 patients were analyzed (52 from Italy and 15 from Austria). Compared to R-SS, WB-MRI identified 29 additional skeletal lesions in 14 patients (including two false-positive lesions). Two skeletal lesions were detected at R-SS and missed at WB-MRI (false negative). Per-lesion sensitivity rates were 78.6% (95% CI: 71.0-85.9) for R-SS and 98.4% (95% CI: 94.4-99.8) for WB-MRI, respectively. Based on WB-MRI findings, six patients would have been upstaged to a higher risk class than staging with R-SS. Conclusions WB-MRI had a significantly higher detection rate for skeletal lesions compared to R-SS. Clinical and radiology expertise is required to avoid upstaging and overtreatment.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available