Journals / Eurasian Journal of Medical Investigation / 2022 / Cilt: 6 - Sayı: 2

Incidental Enchondromas of the Lower Extremity Long Bones and Atypical Chondroid Tumors Differentiation Based on Hounsfield Units

Pages
245–258
Publication Date
2022-10-12
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Overall, minimum and maximum Hounsfield Units measurements were conducted in all 3 planes using region-of-interest (ROI) circles.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objectives: To determine the prevalence of enchondroma (EC) in adults, which was detected as an incidental finding in the lower extremity long bones on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and to detect imaging differences between EC and atypical chondroid tumor (ACT).
📊
Key Findings & Data:Methods: A retrospective review of lower extremity MRI scans was performed in patients over 18 years of age.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Overall, minimum and maximum Hounsfield Units measurements were conducted in all 3 planes using region-of-interest (ROI) circles.
🔬Design:Review & Systematic Survey
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Objectives: To determine the prevalence of enchondroma (EC) in adults, which was detected as an incidental finding in the lower extremity long bones on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and to detect imaging differences between EC and atypical chondroid tumor (ACT). Methods: A retrospective review of lower extremity MRI scans was performed in patients over 18 years of age. The location, size, and appearance of ECs and ACTs were established. The patients who were diagnosed with definitive EC and ACT after undergoing a biopsy were evaluated whether they had computed tomography (CT) examinations. Sagittal, coronal and axial reconstructions were performed in the patients with CT. Overall, minimum and maximum Hounsfield Units measurements were conducted in all 3 planes using region-of-interest (ROI) circles. Results: A total of 20,864 MR scans were reviewed. EC was detected in 2.2% and ACT in 0.08% of all MRIs including the lower extremity long bones. EC was observed to be most in the MR images taken for the knee (2.209%). EC was detected to be 1.6% in the proximal femur, 1.9% in the femur diaphysis, 1.8% in the distal femur, and 0.4% in the proximal tibia. Conclusion: The present study showed that tumors may be significant for ACT if their length is more than 4.5 cm, their width is greater than 2 cm, and they are growing more than 6 mm at follow-up. It was determined that the lower the CT attenuation measurements (Hounsfield Units), the higher the probability of having ACT.

🔖

Cite This Article

ZENGİN, E. C., DEMİR, O., BALTA, O., EREN, M. B., ALTINAYAK, H., AYTEKİN, K. (2022). Incidental Enchondromas of the Lower Extremity Long Bones and Atypical Chondroid Tumors Differentiation Based on Hounsfield Units. Eurasian Journal of Medical Investigation, Cilt: 6 - Sayı: 2, 245–258. https://ajindex.com/articles/508529

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (15)

  1. Afonso PD, Isaac A, Villagrán JM. Chondroid tumors as incidental findings and differential diagnosis between enchondromas and low-grade chondrosarcomas. Semin Musculoskelet Radiol 2019;23:3–18
  2. Stomp W, Reijnierse M, Kloppenburg M, de Mutsert R, Bovée JV, den Heijer M, et al; NEO study group. Prevalence of cartilaginous tumours as an incidental finding on MRI of the knee. Eur Radiol 2015;25:3480–7
  3. Hong ED, Carrino JA, Weber KL, Fayad LM. Prevalence of shoulder enchondromas on routine MR imaging. Clin Imaging 2011;35:378–84
  4. Walden MJ, Murphey MD, Vidal JA. Incidental enchondromas of the knee. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2008;190:1611–5
  5. Berland LL, Silverman SG, Gore RM, Mayo-Smith WW, Megibow AJ, Yee J, et al. Managing incidental findings on abdominal CT: white paper of the ACR incidental findings committee. J Am Coll Radiol 2010;7:754–73
  6. Donthineni R, Ofluoğlu O. Solitary enchondromas of long bones: pattern of referral and outcome. Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc 2010;44:397–402
  7. Douis H, Saifuddin A. The imaging of cartilaginous bone tumours. I. Benign lesions. Skeletal radiology. 2012;41(10):1195- 212
  8. Grainger R, Stuckey S, O'Sullivan R, Davis SR, Ebeling PR, Wluka AE. What is the clinical and ethical importance of incidental abnormalities found by knee MRI? Arthritis Res Ther 2008;10:R18
  9. Murphey MD, Flemming DJ, Boyea SR, Bojescul JA, Sweet DE, Temple HT. Enchondroma versus chondrosarcoma in the appendicular skeleton: differentiating features. Radiographics 1998;18:1213–37
  10. Choi BB, Jee WH, Sunwoo HJ, Cho JH, Kim JY, Chun KA, et al. MR differentiation of low-grade chondrosarcoma from enchondroma. Clin Imaging 2013;37:542–7
  11. Zamora T. Enchondroma. Bone Tumors. London: Springer; 2021. p. 57–62
  12. Bui KL, Ilaslan H, Bauer TW, Lietman SA, Joyce MJ, Sundaram M. Cortical scalloping and cortical penetration by small eccentric chondroid lesions in the long tubular bones: not a sign of malignancy? Skeletal Radiol 2009;38:791–6
  13. Skeletal Lesions Interobserver Correlation among Expert Diagnosticians (SLICED) Study Group. Reliability of histopathologic and radiologic grading of cartilaginous neoplasms in long bones. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2007;89:2113–23
  14. Silva MJ, Keaveny TM, Hayes WC. Computed tomographybased finite element analysis predicts failure loads and fracture patterns for vertebral sections. J Orthop Res 1998;16:300–8
  15. Ferrer-Santacreu EM, Ortiz-Cruz EJ, González-López JM, Pérez Fernández E. Enchondroma versus low-