AJR ARRS Member Benefits
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Frank, J. A.
Right arrow Articles by Dwyer, A. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Frank, J. A.
Right arrow Articles by Dwyer, A. J.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?

American Journal of Roentgenology, Vol 155, 1043-1048, Copyright © 1990 by American Roentgen Ray Society

ARTICLES

Detection of malignant bone tumors: MR imaging vs scintigraphy

JA Frank, A Ling, NJ Patronas, JA Carrasquillo, K Horvath, AM Hickey and AJ Dwyer
Department of Diagnostic Radiology, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892.

One hundred six patients with a known or suspected diagnosis of bone cancer (11 patients with biopsy-proved primary tumors, 95 patients with metastatic disease) were evaluated with scintigraphy and MR imaging to determine the relative sensitivity of each technique in the detection of bone disease. MR imaging was performed at 0.5 T as part of the entry evaluation into Intramural Research Board protocols (30%), for evaluation of cord compression, or because of an equivocal scintigram. MR was performed with T1-weighted (e.g., 300-500/10-20 [TR/TE]), T2- weighted (e.g., 2000/80) spin-echo (SE), and a short-TI inversion recovery (STIR) pulse sequence. Scintigrams were performed with 99mTc- methylene diphosphonate. A retrospective analysis showed that in 30 (28%) of 106 patients, MR imaging performed over a limited region of interest revealed a focal abnormality consistent with tumor that was not observed on scintigraphy. Only one patient had an abnormality on scintigraphy, caused by a metastasis, that was not found on MR images. In 73 (69%) of the 106 patients, the results of MR imaging and scintigraphy were equivalent; in 41 cases results of both techniques were normal. A McNemar analysis of the discordant cases showed MR imaging to be more sensitive than scintigraphy was (p less than .001). Our results suggest that although MR imaging has a greater sensitivity in detecting focal disease, scintigraphy is still the most useful screening test for evaluating the entire skeleton. MR imaging should be reserved for clarification of scintigraphic findings when suspicion is high for tumor.
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
G. S. Stacy, R. S. Mahal, and T. D. Peabody
Staging of bone tumors: a review with illustrative examples.
Am. J. Roentgenol., April 1, 2006; 186(4): 967 - 976.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab.Home page
E. Mirallie, J. P. Vuillez, S. Bardet, E. Frampas, B. Dupas, L. Ferrer, A. Faivre-Chauvet, A. Murat, B. Charbonnel, J. Barbet, et al.
High Frequency of Bone/Bone Marrow Involvement in Advanced Medullary Thyroid Cancer
J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab., February 1, 2005; 90(2): 779 - 788.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 RadioGraphicsHome page
C. J. Kellenberger, M. Epelman, S. F. Miller, and P. S. Babyn
Fast STIR Whole-Body MR Imaging in Children
RadioGraphics, September 1, 2004; 24(5): 1317 - 1330.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 JCOHome page
T. Hamaoka, J. E. Madewell, D. A. Podoloff, G. N. Hortobagyi, and N. T. Ueno
Bone Imaging in Metastatic Breast Cancer
J. Clin. Oncol., July 15, 2004; 22(14): 2942 - 2953.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 JNMHome page
W. G. Meijer, E. van der Veer, P. L. Jager, E. J. van der Jagt, B. A. Piers, I. P. Kema, E. G.E. de Vries, and P. H.B. Willemse
Bone Metastases in Carcinoid Tumors: Clinical Features, Imaging Characteristics, and Markers of Bone Metabolism
J. Nucl. Med., February 1, 2003; 44(2): 184 - 191.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
H. E. Daldrup-Link, C. Franzius, T. M. Link, D. Laukamp, J. Sciuk, H. Jurgens, O. Schober, and E. J. Rummeny
Whole-Body MR Imaging for Detection of Bone Metastases in Children and Young Adults: Comparison with Skeletal Scintigraphy and FDG PET
Am. J. Roentgenol., July 1, 2001; 177(1): 229 - 236.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 The OncologistHome page
M. H. Bilsky, E. Lis, J. Raizer, H. Lee, and P. Boland
The Diagnosis and Treatment of Metastatic Spinal Tumor
Oncologist, December 1, 1999; 4(6): 459 - 469.
[Abstract] [Full Text]

Home page
 JCOHome page
H. Schirrmeister, A. Guhlmann, J. Kotzerke, C. Santjohanser, T. Kuhn, R. Kreienberg, P. Messer, K. Nussle, K. Elsner, G. Glatting, et al.
Early Detection and Accurate Description of Extent of Metastatic Bone Disease in Breast Cancer With Fluoride Ion and Positron Emission Tomography
J. Clin. Oncol., August 1, 1999; 17(8): 2381 - 2381.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 RadiologyHome page
L. J. Horvath, B. A. Burtness, S. McCarthy, and K. M. Johnson
Total-Body Echo-planar MR Imaging in the Staging of Breast Cancer: Comparison with Conventional Methods—Early Experience
Radiology, April 1, 1999; 211(1): 119 - 128.
[Abstract] [Full Text]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1990 by the American Roentgen Ray Society.