Show simple item record

Skull metastases and osseous venous malformations: The role of diffusion-weighted and dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI

dc.contributor.authorKurokawa, Ryo
dc.contributor.authorKurokawa, Mariko
dc.contributor.authorHolmes, Adam
dc.contributor.authorBaba, Akira
dc.contributor.authorBapuraj, Jayapalli
dc.contributor.authorCapizzano, Aristides
dc.contributor.authorKim, John
dc.contributor.authorSrinivasan, Ashok
dc.contributor.authorMoritani, Toshio
dc.date.accessioned2022-12-05T16:40:16Z
dc.date.available2023-12-05 11:40:15en
dc.date.available2022-12-05T16:40:16Z
dc.date.issued2022-11
dc.identifier.citationKurokawa, Ryo; Kurokawa, Mariko; Holmes, Adam; Baba, Akira; Bapuraj, Jayapalli; Capizzano, Aristides; Kim, John; Srinivasan, Ashok; Moritani, Toshio (2022). "Skull metastases and osseous venous malformations: The role of diffusion-weighted and dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI." Journal of Neuroimaging 32(6): 1170-1176.
dc.identifier.issn1051-2284
dc.identifier.issn1552-6569
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/175212
dc.description.abstractBackground and PurposeSkull metastasis (SM) is a common secondary malignancy. We evaluated the diagnostic performance of diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) and dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in differentiating SM from osseous venous malformations and SM of various origins.MethodsThis study included 31 patients with SM (median age, 64�years; range, 41-87�years; 29 women; 24 and 7 patients with breast and non-small cell lung cancer, respectively) and 16 with osseous venous malformations (median age, 68�years; range, 20-81�years; 10 women) who underwent both DWI and dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI between January 2015 and October 2021. Normalized mean apparent diffusion coefficients (ADCs) and dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI parameters were compared between SM and osseous venous malformations, and between breast cancer and non-small cell lung cancer. Multivariate stepwise logistic regression analyses were performed to identify statistically significant parameters.ResultsPlasma volume and time-to-maximum enhancement were the most statistically significant parameters for differentiating SM from osseous venous malformations, with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.962. The normalized mean ADC and peak enhancement values were the most statistically significant parameters for differentiating breast cancer from non-small cell lung cancer, with an area under the curve of 0.924.ConclusionsOur results highlight the efficacious diagnostic performance of DWI and dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI in distinguishing SM from osseous venous malformations and differentiating SM of various origins.
dc.publisherWiley Periodicals, Inc.
dc.subject.otherosseous venous malformation
dc.subject.otherdiffusion-weighted imaging
dc.subject.otherdynamic contrast-enhanced
dc.subject.otherskull metastasis
dc.titleSkull metastases and osseous venous malformations: The role of diffusion-weighted and dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI
dc.typeArticle
dc.rights.robotsIndexNoFollow
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelNeurosciences
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelHealth Sciences
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer Reviewed
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/175212/1/jon13034_am.pdf
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/175212/2/jon13034.pdf
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/jon.13034
dc.identifier.sourceJournal of Neuroimaging
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMouridsen K, Christensen S, Gyldensted L, Ostergaard L. Automatic selection of arterial input function using cluster analysis. Magn Reson Med. 2006; 55: 524 - 31.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceTofe AJ, Francis MD, Harvey WJ. Correlation of neoplasms with incidence and localization of skeletal metastases: an analysis of 1,355 diphosphonate bone scans. J Nucl Med. 1975; 16: 986 - 9.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKotecha R, Angelov L, Barnett GH, et�al. Calvarial and skull base metastases: expanding the clinical utility of gamma Knife surgery. J Neurosurg. 2014; 121 (Suppl): 91 - 101.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMitsuya K, Nakasu Y, Horiguchi S, et�al. Metastatic skull tumors: MRI features and a new conventional classification. J Neurooncol. 2011; 104: 239 - 45.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceNemeth AJ, Henson JW, Mullins ME, Gonzalez RG, Schaefer PW. Improved detection of skull metastasis with diffusion-weighted MR imaging. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2007; 28: 1088 - 92.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKerkhof M, Ganeff I, Wiggenraad RGJ, et�al. Clinical applicability of and changes in perfusion MR imaging in brain metastases after stereotactic radiotherapy. J Neurooncol. 2018; 138: 133 - 9.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceNguyen TB, Cron GO, Perdrizet K, et�al. Comparison of the diagnostic accuracy of DSC- and dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI in the preoperative grading of astrocytomas. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2015; 36: 2017 - 22.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceChoi SH, Jung SC, Kim KW, et�al. Perfusion MRI as the predictive/prognostic and pharmacodynamic biomarkers in recurrent malignant glioma treated with bevacizumab: a systematic review and a time-to-event meta-analysis. J Neurooncol. 2016; 128: 185 - 94.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceJung BC, Arevalo-Perez J, Lyo JK, et�al. Comparison of glioblastomas and brain metastases using dynamic contrast-enhanced perfusion MRI. J Neuroimaging. 2016; 26: 240 - 6.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceOta Y, Liao E, Capizzano AA, et�al. Diagnostic role of diffusion-weighted and dynamic contrast-enhanced perfusion MR imaging in paragangliomas and schwannomas in the head and neck. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2021; 42: 1839 - 46.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMorales KA, Arevalo-Perez J, Peck KK, Holodny AI, Lis E, Karimi S. Differentiating atypical hemangiomas and metastatic vertebral lesions: the role of T1-weighted dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2018; 39: 968 - 73.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGomez CK, Schiffman SR, Bhatt AA. Radiological review of skull lesions. Insights Imaging. 2018; 9: 857 - 82.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceTofts PS. Modeling tracer kinetics in dynamic Gd-DTPA MR imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging. 1997; 7: 91 - 101.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceYouden WJ. Index for rating diagnostic tests. Cancer. 1950; 3: 32 - 5.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLaigle-Donadey F, Taillibert S, Martin-Duverneuil N, Hildebrand J, Delattre JY. Skull-base metastases. J Neurooncol. 2005; 75: 63 - 9.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMichael CB, Gokaslan ZL, DeMonte F, McCutcheon IE, Sawaya R, Lang FF. Surgical resection of calvarial metastases overlying dural sinuses. Neurosurgery. 2001; 48: 745 - 54.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceNayak L, Abrey LE, Iwamoto FM. Intracranial dural metastases. Cancer. 2009; 115: 1947 - 53.
dc.identifier.citedreferencePons Escoda A, Naval Baudin P, Mora P, et�al. Imaging of skull vault tumors in adults. Insights Imaging. 2020; 11: 23.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBastug D, Ortiz O, Schochet SS. Hemangiomas in the calvaria: imaging findings. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1995; 164: 683 - 7.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceChuang MT, Liu YS, Tsai YS, Chen YC, Wang CK. Differentiating radiation-induced necrosis from recurrent brain tumor using MR perfusion and spectroscopy: a meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2016; 11: e0141438.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRyu KH, Baek HJ, Cho SB, et�al. Skull metastases detecting on arterial spin labeling perfusion: three case reports and review of literature. Medicine. 2017; 96: e8432.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMeyer HJ, Fiedler E, Kornhuber M, Spielmann RP, Surov A. Comparison of diffusion-weighted imaging findings in brain metastases of different origin. Clin Imaging. 2015; 39: 965 - 9.
dc.working.doiNOen
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.