medigraphic.com
ISSN 2992-8036 (Electronic)
ISSN 2306-4102 (Print)
Órgano Oficial del Colegio Mexicano de Ortopedia y Traumatología

2019, Number 6

<< Back Next >>

Acta Ortop Mex 2019; 33 (6)

Correlation between imagenological and histological diagnosis of bone tumors. A retrospective study

Salazar C, Leite M, Sousa A, Torres J

Language: English
References: 13
Page: 386-390
PDF size: 184.48 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Introduction: The objective of this study was to retrospectively compare imaging techniques with histopathological findings from bone biopsy. Material and methods: Imaging techniques such as X-Ray, CT scan and MRI where compared with the histopathological findings from bone biopsy, in a population of 64 patients with bone tumors, with 64.1% of males and an age range of 5 to 79 years. Results: Histologically, 39.1% were malignant bone tumors, while 60.9% were benign. The X-ray showed 90% of diagnostic accuracy, with sensitivity of 92.9%, specificity of 87.5%, positive predictive value of 86.7% and negative predictive value of 93.3%. CT scan presented 75.9% of diagnostic accuracy, with 84.6, 68.8, and 84.6% of sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value, respectively. The MRI documented a diagnostic accuracy of 95.1%, with 94.4% os sensitivity, 95.7% of specificity, 94.4% of positive predictive value and 95.7% for negative predictive value. This showed a great agreement between the histology findings and those within the X-Ray and MRI (K = 0.8 and 0.9, respectively), but doesn’t depreciate the value of bone biopsy in diagnosis of bone tumors. Conclusion: This data showed good correlation between imagenological and histopatologic techniques.


REFERENCES

  1. Negash B, Admasie D, Wamisho B, Tinsay MW. Bone tumors at Addis Ababa University, Ethiopia: agreement between radiological and histopathological diagnosis, a 5-year analysis at Black-Lion Teaching Hospital. IJMMS. 2009; 1-4: 119-25.

  2. Franchi A. Epidemiology and classification of bone tumors. Clin Cases Miner Bone Metab. 2012; 9(2): 92-5.

  3. Wu J, Hockman M. Bone tumors: a practical guide to imaging. New York, NY: Springer New York : Imprint : Springer, 2012; pp. 1-9.

  4. Dorfman H, Czerniak B, Kotz R. WHO Classification of bone tumors. Introduction In: Pathology and genetics. Tumor of soft tissue and bone, IARC Press. 2002; 225-232.

  5. Costelloe C, Madewell J. Radiography in the initial diagnosis of primary bone tumors. ARJ Am J Roentgenol. 2013; 200(1): 3-7.

  6. Mintz D, Hwang S. Bone tumor imaging, then and now. HSS J. 2014; 10(3): 230-9.

  7. Morley N, Omar I. Imaging evaluation of musculoskeletal tumors. Cancer Treat Res. 2014; 162: 9-29.

  8. Pommersheim W, Chew F. Imaging, diagnosis and stating of bone tumors: a primer. Semin Roentgenol. 2004; 39(3): 361-72.

  9. Erleman R. Imaging and differential diagnosis of primary bone tumors and tumor-like lesions of the spine. Eur J Radiol. 2006; 58: 48-67.

  10. Aly A, Shaaban H, Abou-Sinna. Accuracy of fine needle aspiration citology in the diagnosis of bone lesions with radiological assistance: experience from the National Cancer Institute, Cairo University, Egypt. Egyptian Journal of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine. 2014; 45: 127-35.

  11. Settakorn J, Lekawanvijit S, Arpornchayanon O, Rangdaeng S, Vanitanakom P, Kongkarnka S, et al. Spectrum of bone tumors in Chiang Mai University Hospital, Thailand according to WHO Classification 2002: a study of 1,001 cases. J Med Assoc Thai. 2006; 89(6): 780-7.

  12. Naz A, Kashif Z, Waris I, Suleman B. Histological and radiological correlation in the diagnosis of bone tumors. JFJMC. 2013; 7(2): 67-70.

  13. Lee JH, Reinus WR, Wilson AJ. Quantitative analysis of the plain radiographic appearance of unicameral bone cysts. Invest Radiol. 1999; 34(1): 28-37.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com