Cargando…

Is PET–CT an accurate method for the differential diagnosis between chondroma and chondrosarcoma?

The differential diagnosis between chondroma and intraosseous chondrosarcoma is based on imaging and clinical exams, but only a biopsy can confirm diagnosis. The aim of this study was to evaluate the value of PET–CT in differentially diagnosing chondroma and chondrosarcoma. From October 2009 to May...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Jesus-Garcia, Reynaldo, Osawa, Akemi, Filippi, Renee Zon, Viola, Dan Carai Maia, Korukian, Marcos, de Carvalho Campos Neto, Guilherme, Wagner, Jairo
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer International Publishing 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4771679/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27026930
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40064-016-1782-8
_version_ 1782418421997109248
author Jesus-Garcia, Reynaldo
Osawa, Akemi
Filippi, Renee Zon
Viola, Dan Carai Maia
Korukian, Marcos
de Carvalho Campos Neto, Guilherme
Wagner, Jairo
author_facet Jesus-Garcia, Reynaldo
Osawa, Akemi
Filippi, Renee Zon
Viola, Dan Carai Maia
Korukian, Marcos
de Carvalho Campos Neto, Guilherme
Wagner, Jairo
author_sort Jesus-Garcia, Reynaldo
collection PubMed
description The differential diagnosis between chondroma and intraosseous chondrosarcoma is based on imaging and clinical exams, but only a biopsy can confirm diagnosis. The aim of this study was to evaluate the value of PET–CT in differentially diagnosing chondroma and chondrosarcoma. From October 2009 to May 2015, 36 patients with cartilaginous bone lesions in the extremities, 12 (33.3 %) men and 24 (66.6 %) women, were prospectively included in the study. Patients ranged in age from 21 to 68 years, with a mean age of 44 years. Lesions were located in the long bones: in the proximal humerus in 26 (72.2 %) patients, in the femoral shaft in 1 (2.7 %), in the distal femur in 7 (19.4 %), and in the proximal tibia in 2 (5.5 %). The SUVmax value of 2.0 was used to separate between patients submitted to surgery and patients submitted to observation. Among the 36 patients studied, 17 (47.2 %) had SUVmax ≤ 2.0, and they were diagnosed as chondroma and they were treated conservatively. Follow-up ranged from 14 to 76 months, averaging 38 months. Nineteen (52.7 %) patients with SUVmax >2.0 were diagnosed as chondrosarcoma and underwent surgery. The area of the curve, calculated considering the SUV variable as numeric, is estimated in 0.966, with a 95 % confidence interval from 0.906 to 1.000. To evaluate the sensitivity, specificity and positive/negative predictive values, it was built a 2 × 2 table. Significance was set at p < 0.05. According the criteria of maximum sensitivity and specificity, the cut point suggested to SUVmax was 2.2. If we consider this point, it is possible to identify 19 of 36 positive cases to chondroma (52.8 %), it means, all chondrosarcomas of the series. We concluded that PET–CT can be used as an objective and quantitative method of differentiating between chondromas and chondrosarcomas located within the long bones. It represents a complementary examination to standard imaging (X-ray, scintigraphy, CT and MRI) and pathological exams. The SUVmax between 2.0 and 2.2 would be a range area between chondroma and chondrosarcoma and this range can be of value, among others exams, in decide the best treatment for patients with cartilaginous lesions in long bones. Level of evidence Level I—diagnostic study—prospectively investigating a diagnostic test using a universally applied “gold” standard.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4771679
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Springer International Publishing
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-47716792016-03-29 Is PET–CT an accurate method for the differential diagnosis between chondroma and chondrosarcoma? Jesus-Garcia, Reynaldo Osawa, Akemi Filippi, Renee Zon Viola, Dan Carai Maia Korukian, Marcos de Carvalho Campos Neto, Guilherme Wagner, Jairo Springerplus Research The differential diagnosis between chondroma and intraosseous chondrosarcoma is based on imaging and clinical exams, but only a biopsy can confirm diagnosis. The aim of this study was to evaluate the value of PET–CT in differentially diagnosing chondroma and chondrosarcoma. From October 2009 to May 2015, 36 patients with cartilaginous bone lesions in the extremities, 12 (33.3 %) men and 24 (66.6 %) women, were prospectively included in the study. Patients ranged in age from 21 to 68 years, with a mean age of 44 years. Lesions were located in the long bones: in the proximal humerus in 26 (72.2 %) patients, in the femoral shaft in 1 (2.7 %), in the distal femur in 7 (19.4 %), and in the proximal tibia in 2 (5.5 %). The SUVmax value of 2.0 was used to separate between patients submitted to surgery and patients submitted to observation. Among the 36 patients studied, 17 (47.2 %) had SUVmax ≤ 2.0, and they were diagnosed as chondroma and they were treated conservatively. Follow-up ranged from 14 to 76 months, averaging 38 months. Nineteen (52.7 %) patients with SUVmax >2.0 were diagnosed as chondrosarcoma and underwent surgery. The area of the curve, calculated considering the SUV variable as numeric, is estimated in 0.966, with a 95 % confidence interval from 0.906 to 1.000. To evaluate the sensitivity, specificity and positive/negative predictive values, it was built a 2 × 2 table. Significance was set at p < 0.05. According the criteria of maximum sensitivity and specificity, the cut point suggested to SUVmax was 2.2. If we consider this point, it is possible to identify 19 of 36 positive cases to chondroma (52.8 %), it means, all chondrosarcomas of the series. We concluded that PET–CT can be used as an objective and quantitative method of differentiating between chondromas and chondrosarcomas located within the long bones. It represents a complementary examination to standard imaging (X-ray, scintigraphy, CT and MRI) and pathological exams. The SUVmax between 2.0 and 2.2 would be a range area between chondroma and chondrosarcoma and this range can be of value, among others exams, in decide the best treatment for patients with cartilaginous lesions in long bones. Level of evidence Level I—diagnostic study—prospectively investigating a diagnostic test using a universally applied “gold” standard. Springer International Publishing 2016-02-29 /pmc/articles/PMC4771679/ /pubmed/27026930 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40064-016-1782-8 Text en © Jesus-Garcia et al. 2016 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
spellingShingle Research
Jesus-Garcia, Reynaldo
Osawa, Akemi
Filippi, Renee Zon
Viola, Dan Carai Maia
Korukian, Marcos
de Carvalho Campos Neto, Guilherme
Wagner, Jairo
Is PET–CT an accurate method for the differential diagnosis between chondroma and chondrosarcoma?
title Is PET–CT an accurate method for the differential diagnosis between chondroma and chondrosarcoma?
title_full Is PET–CT an accurate method for the differential diagnosis between chondroma and chondrosarcoma?
title_fullStr Is PET–CT an accurate method for the differential diagnosis between chondroma and chondrosarcoma?
title_full_unstemmed Is PET–CT an accurate method for the differential diagnosis between chondroma and chondrosarcoma?
title_short Is PET–CT an accurate method for the differential diagnosis between chondroma and chondrosarcoma?
title_sort is pet–ct an accurate method for the differential diagnosis between chondroma and chondrosarcoma?
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4771679/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27026930
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40064-016-1782-8
work_keys_str_mv AT jesusgarciareynaldo ispetctanaccuratemethodforthedifferentialdiagnosisbetweenchondromaandchondrosarcoma
AT osawaakemi ispetctanaccuratemethodforthedifferentialdiagnosisbetweenchondromaandchondrosarcoma
AT filippireneezon ispetctanaccuratemethodforthedifferentialdiagnosisbetweenchondromaandchondrosarcoma
AT violadancaraimaia ispetctanaccuratemethodforthedifferentialdiagnosisbetweenchondromaandchondrosarcoma
AT korukianmarcos ispetctanaccuratemethodforthedifferentialdiagnosisbetweenchondromaandchondrosarcoma
AT decarvalhocamposnetoguilherme ispetctanaccuratemethodforthedifferentialdiagnosisbetweenchondromaandchondrosarcoma
AT wagnerjairo ispetctanaccuratemethodforthedifferentialdiagnosisbetweenchondromaandchondrosarcoma