Display options
Share it on

Skeletal Radiol. 1991;20(2):79-84. doi: 10.1007/BF00193815.

Magnetic resonance imaging of disseminated bone marrow disease in patients treated for malignancy.

Skeletal radiology

S L Hanna, B D Fletcher, D L Fairclough, J H Jenkins, A H Le

Affiliations

  1. Department of Diagnostic Imaging, St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Memphis, Tennessee 38101.

PMID: 2020867 DOI: 10.1007/BF00193815

Abstract

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is a sensitive method for the diagnosis of bone marrow abnormalities, but its usefulness in detecting active disseminated cancer in this tissue in treated patients has not been determined. We therefore examined 14 children who had been treated for disseminated bone marrow involvement by neuroblastoma (n = 6), lymphoma (n = 3), Ewing's sarcoma (n = 3), osteosarcoma (n = 1), and leukemia (n = 1). MRI studies were performed at 21 marrow sites to evaluate residual or recurrent tumor and were correlated with histologic material from the same site. T1- and T2-weighted sequences were employed in 21 and 14 studies, respectively; short tau inversion recovery (STIR) in 18; and static gadolinium diethylene triamine pentaacetic acid (Gd-DPTA)-enhanced. T1-weighted sequences in 13. All MRI studies showed an altered bone marrow signal. Technetium 99m methylene diphosphonate (99mTc-MDP) bone scintigraphy was also performed (19 studies). On histologic examination, 7 marrow specimens contained tumor, and 14 did not. Of the 7 tumor-positive lesions, all T1-weighted, 4 of 6 T2-weighted, and all 6 STIR sequences showed abnormal signal; all 5 Gd-DTPA-enhanced. T1-weighted sequences showed enhancement of the lesion. However, abnormal signals were also observed on all T1-weighted, 6 of 8 T2-weighted, 11 of 12 STIR, and 5 of 8 Gd-DTPA-enhanced, T1-weighted images of the tumor-negative sites. In this clinical setting, MRI did not consistently differentiate changes associated with treatment from malignant disease.

Similar articles

Show all 9 similar articles

Cited by

References

  1. Radiology. 1988 Sep;168(3):827-36 - PubMed
  2. Radiology. 1985 Jun;155(3):709-18 - PubMed
  3. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1990 Aug;155(2):343-6 - PubMed
  4. Radiology. 1986 Jul;160(1):237-40 - PubMed
  5. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1986 Feb;146(2):353-8 - PubMed
  6. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1990 Apr;154(4):763-9 - PubMed
  7. Radiology. 1989 Jun;171(3):767-73 - PubMed
  8. Acta Radiol. 1987 Mar-Apr;28(2):199-205 - PubMed
  9. Radiology. 1990 Feb;174(2):517-26 - PubMed
  10. Radiology. 1987 Nov;165(2):541-4 - PubMed
  11. Radiology. 1987 Jul;164(1):243-5 - PubMed
  12. Invest Radiol. 1986 Jul;21(7):540-6 - PubMed
  13. Radiol Clin North Am. 1986 Jun;24(2):269-89 - PubMed
  14. Skeletal Radiol. 1990;19(2):113-6 - PubMed
  15. Radiology. 1989 Nov;173(2):335-9 - PubMed
  16. Radiology. 1990 Jun;175(3):791-6 - PubMed
  17. Radiology. 1987 Mar;162(3):701-7 - PubMed
  18. Radiology. 1988 Dec;169(3):799-804 - PubMed
  19. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1987 Oct;149(4):831-7 - PubMed
  20. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 1986 Mar-Apr;10(2):205-9 - PubMed
  21. J Clin Oncol. 1987 Feb;5(2):225-30 - PubMed
  22. Magn Reson Imaging. 1987;5(4):251-7 - PubMed
  23. Pediatr Radiol. 1989;20(1-2):72-5 - PubMed
  24. Radiology. 1985 May;155(2):429-32 - PubMed
  25. Radiology. 1984 Jun;151(3):715-8 - PubMed
  26. Radiat Med. 1985 Jan-Mar;3(1):47-55 - PubMed

Substances

MeSH terms

Publication Types

Grant support

LinkOut - more resources