Jaramillo-Núñez A, Pérez-Meza M

Language: Spanish
References: 11
Page: 121-126
PDF size: 283.64 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Introduction. Some authors claim that it is impossible to detect early bone metastasis in flat x-rays. However, mainly due to its cost, it remains the first diagnostic tool for the disease and, when it cannot be observed, other techniques are employed. To date, digital image processing techniques have been implemented successfully in diagnoses such as magnetic resonance and computed tomography, mainly, but have been ignored to some extent in the case of x-rays. This article shows how the application of these techniques in x-rays, in particular in searching for bone metastasis, improves diagnosis.
Material and methods. Over approximately one year, three xrays and two bone gammagrams were taken of a patient with breast cancer and metastasis in the humeral head of the right shoulder. The interval between the first and second x-rays was approximately one month, and between the first and third was one year. The interval between the first x-ray and the first gammagram was less than two months and between the first and second gammagrams was one year. The x-rays were analyzed using digital image processing techniques and the results obtained are promising.
Discussion. The diagnoses of the three x-rays do not mention that the patient presented bone metastasis in the humeral head. We know that to establish an accurate diagnosis the x-ray must satisfy certain minimum requisites which are not always met. The results obtained in the second x-ray using digital processing suggest that it is possible to detect early bone metastasis because the x-ray contains the necessary information, although it is not visible to the naked eye.
Conclusion. Digital processing of x-rays can be a highly valuable diagnostic tool, but further work is needed to improve the technique. Now that x-rays can be taken digitally, it will also be possible to apply digital processing techniques in this kind of diagnosis.

REFERENCES

1. Singh A and Rabani SA, Bone metastasis: Experimental and clinical Therapeutics, First ed. New Jersey: Humana Press, 2004.

2. Baert AL, Encyclopedia de diagnostic imaging, First ed. Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 2008.

3. Lerat JP, Cáncer óseo secundario [Conference], Centre Hospitalier Lyon-Sud, Disponible en: http/www.leratorthopedie.com/ES/cours/dipositivas/8.Power%20P.Tumores/11-%20Cancer%20Oseo%20Secundario.ppt

4. Jacox AK, Carr DB, Payne R., et al., Management of cancer pain, Texas (Tex); Agency for Health Care Policy and Research, 1994 March, Report No. 94-0592.

5. Ahuja AT, Antonio GE, Wang KT and Yuen HY, Case studies in medical imaging: radiology for students and trainees, First ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006.

6. Garbayo AJ, Villafranca E, De blas A, Tejero A, Eslava E, Manterola A, et all, Metastatic bone disease: Diagnosis and treatment, Anales, 2004. Disponible en: http://www.cfnavarra.es/salud/anales/textos/vol27/sup3/suple14a.html.

7. Choong PF, The molecular basis of skeletal metastases, Clin Orthop Relat Res Suppl 2003;415:S19-30.

8. Canon CL, Radiology, First ed. New York: Mc. Graw Hill Medical, 2010.

9. Hamaoka T, Madewell JE, Podoloff DA, Hortobagyi GN, Hueno NT, Bone imaging in metastatic breast cancer, J Clin Oncol 2004;422:2942-2953.

10. González RC, Woods RE and Eddins SL, Digital Image Processing Using Matlab, Sec ed. Gatesmark: Tata McGraw-Hill, 2010.

11. González RG, Woods RE, Digital image processing, First ed. Wilmington: Addison-Wesley, 1992.