4.5 Article

The role of MRS in the differentiation of benign and malignant soft tissue and bone tumors

Journal

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY
Volume 79, Issue 2, Pages E33-E37

Publisher

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2010.12.089

Keywords

Bone tumor; Soft tissue tumor; MR spectroscopy

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: The aim of our study was to investigate the value of choline in the discrimination of benign and malignant soft tissue and bone tumors. Materials and methods: The study group consisted of thirty subjects with bone or soft tissue tumors larger than 1.5 cm in diameter. The experiments were performed in a 1.5 T MR scanner. Coils were selected according to specific locations. A single-voxel MRS was performed for three different TE (time to echo) (31, 136, 272 ms). The volume of interest was positioned on the brightest enhancement. The presence of a cholin peak on at least 2 of these spectrums was considered as the marker of malignancy. The sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of the MRS in the detection and diagnosis of malignant lesions were calculated. The reproducibility of MRS and histopathological results were tested with kappa statistics. Results: Histopathologically, 18 (60%) of the lesions were classed as malignant whereas 12 (40%) were classed as benign. With MRS, 15 (50%) of these lesions were classed as malignant and 15 (50%) as benign. Two patients who were found spectroscopically to have malignant tumors were shown histopathologically to have benign types. Five patients with an MRS showing a benign type were classed with malignant types in histopathological examinations. MRS had a sensitivity rate of 72.2%, specificity of 83.3%, and an accuracy rate of 76.6% in detecting malignant bone and soft tissue tumors. The interrater reliability of both techniques had a kappa value of 0.533. Conclusions: MRS may help in the differentiation of benign and malignant soft tissue and bone tumors. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available