The value of apparent diffusion coefficient measurements in the differential diagnosis of vertebral bone marrow lesions

To be able to differentiate benign vertebral bone marrow lesions from malign lesions according to apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values, enabling quantitative assessment, and to determine the sensitivity and the specificity in differentiating benign and malign lesions according to the optimal cutoff ADC value. Materials and methods: In 99 patients, 133 lesions in total were included in the study, 59 of which were benign (acute vertebral compression fracture depending on osteoporosis or trauma, spondylitis, atypical hemangioma), and 74 malign (malign compression fracture, metastasis). Each of the benign lesions was compared to the malign lesions. In the statistical analysis, normality tests, variance analysis tests, and the Tukey HSD multi-discriminant analysis tests were performed for all measurable variables. The optimal cutoff ADC value was determined by ROC analysis in the differentiation of benign and malignant lesions. Results: The mean ADC value of the benign induced acute compression fractures was significantly higher than that of the malign induced compression fractures, and the mean ADC value of the spondylitis atypical hemangiomas was significantly higher than that of the malign lesions (P < 0.0001). According to the optimal cutoff value of 1.32 × 10-3 mm2/s, determined for the differentiation of benign and malignant vertebral bone-marrow lesions, sensitivity was 96.5%, specificity 95.2%, positive predictive value 96.5%, and negative predictive value 95.2%. Conclusion: Vertebral bone-marrow pathologies were differentiated as benign or malignant with high sensitivity and specificity with the aid of ADC values calculated from maps obtained by DWI.

The value of apparent diffusion coefficient measurements in the differential diagnosis of vertebral bone marrow lesions

To be able to differentiate benign vertebral bone marrow lesions from malign lesions according to apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values, enabling quantitative assessment, and to determine the sensitivity and the specificity in differentiating benign and malign lesions according to the optimal cutoff ADC value. Materials and methods: In 99 patients, 133 lesions in total were included in the study, 59 of which were benign (acute vertebral compression fracture depending on osteoporosis or trauma, spondylitis, atypical hemangioma), and 74 malign (malign compression fracture, metastasis). Each of the benign lesions was compared to the malign lesions. In the statistical analysis, normality tests, variance analysis tests, and the Tukey HSD multi-discriminant analysis tests were performed for all measurable variables. The optimal cutoff ADC value was determined by ROC analysis in the differentiation of benign and malignant lesions. Results: The mean ADC value of the benign induced acute compression fractures was significantly higher than that of the malign induced compression fractures, and the mean ADC value of the spondylitis atypical hemangiomas was significantly higher than that of the malign lesions (P < 0.0001). According to the optimal cutoff value of 1.32 × 10-3 mm2/s, determined for the differentiation of benign and malignant vertebral bone-marrow lesions, sensitivity was 96.5%, specificity 95.2%, positive predictive value 96.5%, and negative predictive value 95.2%. Conclusion: Vertebral bone-marrow pathologies were differentiated as benign or malignant with high sensitivity and specificity with the aid of ADC values calculated from maps obtained by DWI.

___

  • Moulopoulos LA, Yoshimitsu K, Johnston DA, Leeds NE, Libshitz HI. MR prediction of benign and malignant vertebral compression fractures. J Magn Reson Imaging 1996; 6: 667–74.
  • Herneth AM, Dominkus M, Kurtaran A, Lang S, Rand T, Kainberger F. Bone metastases: new trends in diagnostic imaging. Wien Med Wochenschr Suppl 2002; 113: 92–4.
  • Zhou XJ, Leeds NE, McKinnon GC, Kumar AJ. Characterization of benign and metastatic vertebral compression fractures with quantitative diffusion MR imaging. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2002; 23: 165–70.
  • Balliu E, Vilanova JC, Pelaez I, Puig J, Remollo S, Barcelo C et al. Diagnostic value of apparent diffusion coefficients to differentiate benign from malignant vertebral bone marrow lesions. European Journal of Radiology 2009; 69: 560–66.
  • Yaşar K, Pehlivanoğlu F, Şengöz A, Şengöz G. Evaluation of radiological findings in 160 adult patients with tuberculous meningitis. Turk J Med Sci 2012; 42: 259–67
  • Palle L, Reddy MB, Reddy KJ. Role of magnetic resonance diffusion imaging and apparent diffusion coefficient values in the evaluation of spinal tuberculosis in Indian patients. Indian J Radiol Imaging. 2010; 20: 279–83.
  • Frager D, Elkin C, Swerdlow M, Bloch S. Subacute osteoporotic compression fracture: misleading magnetic resonance appearance. Skeletal Radiol 1988; 17: 123–26.
  • Le Bihan D, Turner R, Douek P, Patronas N. Diffusion MR imaging: clinical applications. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1992; 159: 591–99.
  • Biffar A, Sourbron S, Dietrich O, Schmidt G, Ingrisch M, Reiser MF et al. Combined diffusion-weighted and dynamic contrast-enhanced imaging of patients with acute osteoporotic vertebral fractures. European Journal of Radiology 2010; 76: 298–303.
  • Bammer R, Fazekas F, Augustin M, Simbrunner J, Strasser FS, Seifert T et al. Diffussion-weighted MR imaging of the spinal cord. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2000; 21: 587–91.
  • Le Bihan D, Breton E, Lallemand D, Aubin ML, Vignaud J, Laval-Jeantet M. Separation of diffusion and perfusion in intravoxel incoherent motion MR imaging. Radiology 1988; 168: 497–505.
  • Herneth AM, Guccione S, Bednarski M. Apparent diffusion coefficient: a quantitative parameter for in vivo tumor characterization. Eur J Radiol 2003; 45: 208–13.
  • Spuentrup E, Buecker A, Adam G, van Vaals JJ, Guenther RW. Diffusion-weighted MR imaging for differentiation of benign fracture edema and tumor infiltration of the vertebral body. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2001; 176: 351–58.
  • Chan JH, Peh WC, Tsui EY, Chau LF, Cheung KK, Chan KB et al. Acute vertebral body compression fractures: discrimination between benign and malignant causes using apparent diffusion coefficients. Br J Radiol 2002; 75: 207–14.
  • Wonglaksanapimon S, Chawalparit O, Khumpunnip S, Tritrakarn SO, Chiewvit P, Charnchaowanish P. Vertebral body compression fracture: discriminating benign from malignant causes by diffusion-weighted MR imaging and apparent diffusion coefficient value. J Med Assoc Thai 2012; 95: 81–7.
  • Mubarak F, Akhtar W. Acute vertebral compression fracture: differentiation of malignant and benign causes by diffusion weighted magnetic resonance imaging. J Pak Med Assoc 2011; 61: 555–58.
  • Pui MH, Mitha A, Rae WI, Corr P. Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging of spinal infection and malinancy. J Neuroimaging 2005; 15: 164–70.
  • Raya JG, Dietrich O, Reiser MF, Baur-Melnyk A. Methods and applications of diffusion imaging of vertebral bone marrow. J Magn Reson Imaging 2006; 24: 1207–20.
  • Koh DM, Collins DJ. Diffusion-weighted MRI in the body: applications and challenges in oncology. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2007; 188: 1622–35.
  • Bammer R. Basic principles of diffusion-weighted imaging. Eur J Radiol 2000; 345: 169–84.
  • Abanoz R, Hakyemez B, Parlak M. Diffusion vertebral imaging
  • of acute vertebral compression fractures: differential diagnosis of benign versus malignant pathologic fractures. Tani Girisim Radyol. 2003; 9: 176–83.
  • Thoeny HC, De Keyzer F. Extracranial applications of diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging. Eur J Radiol 2007; 17: 1385–93.
  • Baur A, Stäbler A, Bruning R, Bartl R, Krödel A, Reiser M et al. Diffusion-weighted MR imaging of bone marrow: differentiation of benign versus pathologic compression fractures. Radiology 1998; 207: 349–56.
  • Castillo M, Arbelaez A, Smith JK, Fisher LL. Diffusion-weighted MR imaging offers no advantage over routine noncontrast MR imaging in the detection of vertebral metastases. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2000; 21: 948–53.
  • Tang G, Liu Y, Li W, Yao J, Li B, Li P. Optimization of b value in diffusion-weighted MRI for the differential diagnosis of benign and malignant vertebral fractures. Skeletal Radiol 2007; 36: 1035–41.
  • Leeds NE, Kumar AJ, Zhou XJ, McKinnon GC. Magnetic resonance imaging of benign spinal lesions simulating metastasis: role of diffusion-weighted imaging. Top Magn Reson Imaging 2000; 11: 224–34.
Turkish Journal of Medical Sciences-Cover
  • ISSN: 1300-0144
  • Yayın Aralığı: Yılda 6 Sayı
  • Yayıncı: TÜBİTAK
Sayıdaki Diğer Makaleler

Relationship between significant coronary artery disease and coronary artery anomalies

Alparslan BİRDANE, Hüseyin Uğur YAZICI, Yüksel AYDAR, Aydın NADİR, Utku ŞENOL, Abdurrahman TASAL, Ömer GÖKTEKİN, Necmi ATA

The value of apparent diffusion coefficient measurements in the differential diagnosis of vertebral bone marrow lesions

Gülten TAŞKIN, Lütfi İNCESU, Kerim ASLAN

A case of childhood vaccination barrier: migrant and seasonal farmworkers

İbrahim KORUK, Zeynep ŞİMŞEK, Süda Tekin KORUK

A multicenter study of the application of Six Sigma management in clinical rational drug use via pharmacist intervention

Lidao BAO, Nan CHEN, Tao SHANG, Puyan FANG, Zhanping XU, Wenchang GUO, Yi WANG

The role of vitamin D deficiency in parathyroid hormone levels

Alpaslan KILIÇARSLAN, Alma CENOLİ ASLAN, Gamze GEZGEN

Effects of ethyl pyruvate administration on female rats' pyramidal cells of cornu ammonis after brain ischemia: a stereological and histopathological study

Orhan BAŞ, Ersan ODACI, Ayşe İKİNCİ

Is renal cell cancer stage migration valid throughout the world?

Emin Yener GÜLTEKİN, Esin YILDIZ, Semih AYAN, Esat KORĞALI, Hüseyin SAYGIN, Ziynet ÇINAR, Gökhan GÖKÇE

Hepatitis G virus and its prevalence and genotypes in patients with hepatitis B and C in Ahvaz, southwestern Iran

Javanmard DAVOD, Makvandi MANOOCHEHR, Hajiani ESKANDAR, Khalafkhany DAVOD, Samarbaf Zadeh REZA ALI

Asymmetric dimethylarginine levels in allergic rhinitis and nasal polyposis

Tayfun APUHAN, Mehmet TOSUN

JAK2 V617F mutation in Iranian patients with myeloproliferative neoplasms: clinical and laboratory findings

Behzad POOPAK, Majid FARSHDOUSTI HAGH, Najmaldin SAKI, Fazel ELAHI, Hamid REZVANI, Gelareh KHOSRAVIPOUR, Mohammad Ali JAHANGIRPOUR, Shirin BOLOURI, Tolou GOLKAR, Parviz FALAH