Evidence Hub

Imaging features of primary lymphoma of bone

Mulligan ME, McRae GA, Murphey MD

AJR. American journal of roentgenology, 1999

223 participants

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to describe the imaging appearances of primary lymphoma of bone, including conventional radiographic, scintigraphic, CT, and MR imaging features.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 237 pathologically proven cases of primary lymphoma of bone. Evaluation included patient age, sex, lesion location, and pattern of bone destruction. Pathologic type, periosteal reaction, sequestrum, soft-tissue mass, extension across joints, and pathologic fracture were also noted.

RESULTS: The study population included 151 males and 86 females (ratio 1.8:1; range, 2-88 years; mean age, 42 years). Common locations were the distal femoral diametaphysis; proximal metadiaphysis of the tibia, femur, and humerus; and femoral mid shaft. Long bones were involved more often than flat bones (71% versus 22%). Common appearances were a lytic (70%) or mixed-density (28%) lesion with most cases showing a permeative or moth-eaten pattern (74%). Periosteal reaction was seen in 58% of the long bones. Sequestra were found in 37 patients (16%). Soft-tissue masses were present in 113 patients (48%). Extension across joints was seen in nine patients (4%). Pathologic fractures occurred in 53 patients (22%). Radionuclide (n = 56), CT (n = 45), and MR (n = 20) features were usually nonspecific. Pathologic types included non-Hodgkin's (n = 223) and Hodgkin's (n = 14) lymphoma.

CONCLUSION: Primary lymphoma of bone most often involves the diametaphysis of a major long bone and…

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: 223 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