The value of apparent diffusion coefficients ( ADCs) in the diagnosis of malignant bone neoplasms<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

马玲　孟悛非　陈应明　江波

MA Ling, MENG Quan-fei ( Correspondence author), CHEN Ying-ming, JIANG Bo

Department of Diagnostic Radiology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou 510080, China

ABSTRACT

Objective：To evaluate the value of apparent diffusion coefficients (ADCs) in the diagnosis of　malignant bone neoplasms.

Methods：Eighteen cases with consecutive primary malignant bone neoplasms of the knee were prospectively enrolled in the study1 Each patient had a controlled preoperative MRI including a SSEPI DWI sequence. With the help of a pathologist, spatially localized histological sampling study of the postoperative specimens was performed1 ADCs of viable tumor (intra－and extraosseous part), peritumoral edema (including soft tissue edema and intramedullary edema), and tumor necrosis of the neoplasms confirmed by spatially localized　histological sampling or following up were calculated and compared.

Results：Mean ADCs of viable tumor ,peritumoral muscle edema, peritumoral marrow edema, tumor nerosis, normal muscle, and normal marrow were(1.181 ±0.236) ×10 ^{- 3}mm²/s(intraosseous part) / (1.158 ±0.259) ×10 ^{- 3}mm²/ s (extraosseous part), (2.347±0.233) ×10 ^{- 3}mm²/s, (1.997 ±0.119) ×10 ^{- 3}mm²/s, (2.230 ±0.208) ×10 ^{- 3}mm²/s, (0.486 ±0.313) ×10 ^{- 3}mm²/s, and (0.483 ±0.288) ×10 ^{- 3}mm²/s, respectively. Statistical differences were significant among all these tissues (F=153.131, P=0.000). The ADCs of viable tumor were higher than that of normal tissues (P<0.05) and lower than that of edematous or necrotic tissues (P <0.05).

Conclusion：ADCs calculation will be a uantitative method in differentiating viable tumor from peritumoral edema, and viable tumor from tumor necrosis, thus, it may help in deciding the exact extent of the tumor and evaluating the volume of the necrotic tumor after　Chemotherapy.

Key words：Bone neoplasms；Magnetic resonance imaging；Pathology；Comparative study