Evidence Hub

Telangiectatic osteosarcoma: radiologic-pathologic comparison

Murphey MD, wan Jaovisidha S, Temple HT, Gannon FH, Jelinek JS, Malawer MM

Radiology, 2003

36 participants

Abstract

PURPOSE: To describe the imaging characteristics of a large series of telangiectatic osteosarcomas with pathologic findings for comparison.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: The authors retrospectively reviewed 40 pathologically confirmed telangiectatic osteosarcomas. Patient demographics and images from radiography (n = 36), bone scintigraphy (n = 17), angiography (n = 4), computed tomography (CT) (n = 25), and magnetic resonance (MR) imaging (n = 27) were evaluated by three authors in consensus for lesion location, size, and intrinsic characteristics. There were 27 men (68%) and 13 women (32%) in the study, with an age range of 4-83 years (mean age, 24 years).

RESULTS: Lesions frequently affected the femur, tibia, and humerus. Radiographs showed geographic bone lysis, a wide zone of transition, and matrix mineralization. CT demonstrated low attenuation, MR demonstrated high signal intensity on T2-weighted images, and both demonstrated hemorrhage, which simulated the appearance of aneurysmal bone cyst. Viable sarcomatous tissue surrounding hemorrhagic and/or necrotic regions was best seen at contrast material-enhanced CT and MR imaging, with thick peripheral, septal, and nodular enhancement in all cases. Subtle matrix mineralization in this viable tissue was best seen at CT. An associated soft-tissue mass was also seen in 19 of 25 cases (76%) at CT and in 24 of 27 cases (89%) at MR imaging.

CONCLUSION: CT and MR imaging findings of telangiectatic osteosarcoma often include thick…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 36 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free