The Role of Susceptibility Weighted Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Differentiation between Lytic and Sclerotic Spine Metastatic Bone Lesions
Article Details
Background: About 30–70% of the diseased patients due to cancer have spinal metastases at postmortem examination and about 14% of the patients with spinal metastases will develop symptomatic lesions during their illness. The morbidity associated with metastatic spinal disease is significant. Aim and objectives: To evaluate the diagnostic performance of susceptibility-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (SWMR) for the differentiation between lytic and sclerotic spine metastatic bone lesions compared to compute tomography (CT). Subjects and methods: A prospective comparative study was conducted at the Diagnostic Radiology department, Suez Canal University hospital, Ismailia, Egypt, including 84 participants. Results: Our study showed a promising diagnostic performance of different MRI techniques including the newly introduced susceptibility weighted MRI sequence for identification of lytic bony lesions with a diagnostic accuracy of 96.43%, sensitivity of 100%, specificity of 92.31%, and positive predictive value of 93.75% and negative predictive value of 100%. The study showed impressive diagnostic performance of different MRI techniques
including the susceptibility weighted sequence for detection of sclerotic bony lesions with a diagnostic accuracy of 89.29%, sensitivity of 90.91%, specificity of 88.24%, and positive predictive value of 83.33% and negative predictive value of 93.75%. We found that using either inverted magnitude MRI sequence alone, phase contrast MRI sequence alone or combining both techniques resulted in similar diagnostic performance with diagnostic accuracy of 89.29%, sensitivity of 90.91%, specificity of 88.24%, positive predictive value of
83.33%, and negative predictive value of 93.75%. Conclusion: we concluded that the susceptibility weighted MRI enables proper differentiation between lytic and sclerotic bony lesions with higher sensitivity and specificity compared to conventional MRI sequences
2. Amirali Modir Shanechi, MD, Matthew Kiczek, Majid Khan, MBBS, MD. Et al. ‘Spine Anatomy Imaging and Update Neuroimag’, Clin N Am. 2019, 29 461–480.
3. Santhosh K, Kesavadas C, Thomas B, Gupta AK, Thamburaj K, Kapilamoorthy TR. ‘Susceptibility weighted imaging: a new tool in magnetic resonance imaging of stroke’. Clin Radiol; 2009, 64(1):74-83.
4. Chen, W. et al. ‘Intracranial calcifications and hemorrhages: characterization with quantitative susceptibility mapping’, Radiology. 2014, 270(2), pp. 496–505.
5. Filippo Del Grande, Sahar J Farahani, John A Carrino, et al. ‘Bone marrow lesions: A systematic diagnostic approach’, Indian Journal of Radiology and Imaging 2014, 24(3).
6. Baur A, Huber A, Ertl-Wagner B. et al. ‘Diagnostic value of increased diffusion weighting of a steady-state free precession sequence for differentiating acute benign osteoporotic fractures from pathologic vertebral compression fractures’, AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2001, 22(2):366–72.
7. Adam S. Wu, MD, Daryl R. Fourney, MD, FRCSC. ‘Evolution of treatment for metastatic spine disease’, Neurosurg Clin N Am. 2004, 15 401–411.
8. Haacke EM, Mittal S, Wu Z. et al. ‘Susceptibility-weighted imaging: technical aspects and clinical applications’, part 1. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol; 2009, 30(1):19–30.
9. Haacke EM, Reichenbach JR. ‘Susceptibility weighted imaging in MRI: basic concepts and clinical applications’, Wiley-Blackwell.2011.
10. Mittal S, Wu Z,Neelavalli J, et al. ‘Suceptibility-weighted imaging: technical aspects and clinical applications, part 2’. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2009, 30:232–52.
11. Lange, M. B. et al. ‘Diagnostic accuracy of imaging methods for the diagnosis of skeletal malignancies: A retrospective analysis against a pathology-proven reference’, European journal of radiology, 2016, 85(1), pp. 61–67.
12. Rory J. Petteys, Daniel M. Sciubba, MD and Ziya L. Gokaslan, MD. ‘Surgical Management of Metastatic Spine Disease’, Semin Spine Surg, 2009, 21:86-92.
13. Böker, S. M. et al. ‘Differentiation of Predominantly Osteoblastic and Osteolytic Spine Metastases by Using Susceptibility-weighted MRI’, Radiology, 2019, 290(1), pp. 146–154.
14. Samuel R S Barnes, E Mark Haacke. ‘Susceptibility-Weighted Imaging: Clinical Angiographic Applications’. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am. 2009, 17 47–61.