AJR Women's Imaging Online
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text
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 Taoka, T.
Right arrow Articles by Berbaum, K. S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Taoka, T.
Right arrow Articles by Berbaum, K. S.
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?
AJR 2001; 176:1525-1530
© American Roentgen Ray Society


Factors Influencing Visualization of Vertebral Metastases on MR Imaging Versus Bone Scintigraphy

Toshiaki Taoka1, Nina A. Mayr, Han J. Lee, William T. C. Yuh, Teresa M. Simonson, Karim Rezai and Kevin S. Berbaum

1 All authors: Department of Radiology, Magnetic Resonance Imaging Center, University of Iowa College of Medicine, 200 Hawkins Dr., Iowa City, IA 52242.

OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to investigate whether the location and size of vertebral body metastases influence the difference in detection rates between MR imaging and bone scintigraphy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS. We retrospectively evaluated the vertebral body lesions detected on MR imaging in 74 patients with known widely disseminated metastatic disease. Three radiologists independently reviewed the MR images and bone scintigraphs. MR imaging findings included lesion size and its spatial relationship to the bony cortex (intramedullary, subcortical, and transcortical) and results were correlated with those of planar technetium 99m bone scintigraphy.

RESULTS. Findings on bone scans were negative for all intramedullary lesions without cortical involvement shown on MR imaging, regardless of their size. Findings on bone scans (71.3% for transcortical and 33.8% for subcortical) were frequently positive for lesions with cortical involvement (trans- or subcortical), and the probability of positive findings on bone scans was also influenced by the lesion size. Statistical analysis showed a positive correlation among cortical involvement, lesion size, and positive findings on bone scintigraphy (p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION. Location (the presence of cortical bone involvement on MR imaging) and size of the vertebral body metastases appear to be important contributing factors to the difference in detection rates between MR imaging and bone scintigraphy. Cortical involvement is likely the cause of positive findings on bone scans. Early vertebral metastases tend to be small and located in the medullary cavity without cortical involvement, and therefore, findings may be positive on MR images but negative on bone scans.


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
RadiologyHome page
H. Hricak, P. L. Choyke, S. C. Eberhardt, S. A. Leibel, and P. T. Scardino
Imaging Prostate Cancer: A Multidisciplinary Perspective
Radiology, April 1, 2007; 243(1): 28 - 53.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
W.-J. Shih, W. T. C. Yuh, J. C. Leonard, and N. A. Mayr
Vertebral SPECT Bone Scintigraphy Should Be Compared with MR imaging for Vertebral Metastases
Am. J. Roentgenol., December 1, 2001; 177(6): 1482 - 1482.
[Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2001 by the American Roentgen Ray Society.