Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.3348/kjr.2018.19.5.930

Role of CT in Differentiating Malignant Focal Splenic Lesions  

Jang, Siwon (Department of Radiology, Seoul National University Hospital)
Kim, Jung Hoon (Department of Radiology, Seoul National University Hospital)
Hur, Bo Yun (Department of Radiology, National Cancer Center)
Ahn, Su Joa (Department of Radiology, Seoul National University Hospital)
Joo, Ijin (Department of Radiology, Seoul National University Hospital)
Kim, Min Ju (Department of Radiology, National Cancer Center)
Han, Joon Koo (Department of Radiology, Seoul National University Hospital)
Publication Information
Korean Journal of Radiology / v.19, no.5, 2018 , pp. 930-937 More about this Journal
Abstract
Objective: The purpose of this study was to asses the CT findings and clinical features differentiating malignant from benign focal splenic lesions. Materials and Methods: Among 673 patients with splenectomy, we included 114 patients with pathologically confirmed focal splenic lesions (malignant = 66, benign = 48). Two radiologists retrospectively assessed CT findings including: size, number, solid component, margin, wall, calcification, contrast-enhancement, lymph node (LN) enlargement and possible malignancy. We assessed clinical features including age, sex, underlying malignancy, fever, and leukocytosis. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to identify significant predictors of malignant lesion. We used receiver operating curve analysis for determination of diagnostic performance. Results: Common findings of malignant lesions include enhanced, mainly solid, ill-defined margin, absence of splenomegaly, absence of the wall, absence of calcification, LN enlargement, and presence of underlying malignancy (p < 0.05). Among them, mainly solid features (odds ratio [OR], 39.098, p = 0.007), LN enlargement (OR, 6.326, p = 0.005), and presence of underlying malignancy (OR, 8.615, p = 0.001) were significant predictors of malignancy. The mean size of benign splenic lesions ($5.8{\pm}3.3cm$) was larger than that of malignant splenic lesions ($4.0{\pm}3.4cm$). Diagnostic performance of CT findings by two reviewers using receiver operating characteristic curve analysis for differentiation of malignant lesions was 0.856 and 0.893, respectively. Conclusion: Solid nature of the splenic mass on CT images, LN enlargement, and presence of underlying malignancy are significant predictors of malignant splenic lesion.
Keywords
Spleen; Splenic diseases; Splenectomy; Computed tomography; Malignancy;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 Kaza RK, Azar S, Al-Hawary MM, Francis IR. Primary and secondary neoplasms of the spleen. Cancer Imaging 2010;10:173-182   DOI
2 Johnson PT, Horton KM, Megibow AJ, Jeffrey RB, Fishman EK. Common incidental findings on MDCT: survey of radiologist recommendations for patient management. J Am Coll Radiol 2011;8:762-767   DOI
3 Palas J, Matos AP, Ramalho M. The spleen revisited: an overview on magnetic resonance imaging. Radiol Res Pract 2013;2013:219297
4 Comperat E, Bardier-Dupas A, Camparo P, Capron F, Charlotte F. Splenic metastases: clinicopathologic presentation, differential diagnosis, and pathogenesis. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2007;131:965-969
5 Stang A, Keles H, Hentschke S, von Seydewitz CU, Dahlke J, Malzfeldt E, et al. Differentiation of benign from malignant focal splenic lesions using sulfur hexafluoride-filled microbubble contrast-enhanced pulse-inversion sonography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2009;193:709-721   DOI
6 Heller MT, Harisinghani M, Neitlich JD, Yeghiayan P, Berland LL. Managing incidental findings on abdominal and pelvic CT and MRI, part 3: white paper of the ACR Incidental Findings Committee II on splenic and nodal findings. J Am Coll Radiol 2013;10:833-839   DOI
7 Robertson F, Leander P, Ekberg O. Radiology of the spleen. Eur Radiol 2001;11:80-95   DOI
8 Hegenscheid K, Seipel R, Schmidt CO, Volzke H, Kuhn JP, Biffar R, et al. Potentially relevant incidental findings on research whole-body MRI in the general adult population: frequencies and management. Eur Radiol 2013;23:816-826   DOI
9 Goerg C, Schwerk WB, Goerg K. Splenic lesions: sonographic patterns, follow-up, differential diagnosis. Eur J Radiol 1991;13:59-66   DOI
10 Mainenti PP, Iodice D, Cozzolino I, Segreto S, Capece S, Sica G, et al. Tomographic imaging of the spleen: the role of morphological and metabolic features in differentiating benign from malignant diseases. Clin Imaging 2012;36:559-567   DOI
11 Urrutia M, Mergo PJ, Ros LH, Torres GM, Ros PR. Cystic masses of the spleen: radiologic-pathologic correlation. Radiographics 1996;16:107-129   DOI
12 Paluska TR, Sise MJ, Sack DI, Sise CB, Egan MC, Biondi M. Incidental CT findings in trauma patients: incidence and implications for care of the injured. J Trauma 2007;62:157-161   DOI
13 Ekeh AP, Walusimbi M, Brigham E, Woods RJ, McCarthy MC. The prevalence of incidental findings on abdominal computed tomography scans of trauma patients. J Emerg Med 2010;38:484-489   DOI
14 Jang KM, Kim SH, Hwang J, Lee SJ, Kang TW, Lee MW, et al. Differentiation of malignant from benign focal splenic lesions: added value of diffusion-weighted MRI. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2014;203:803-812   DOI
15 Saboo SS, Krajewski KM, O'Regan KN, Giardino A, Brown JR, Ramaiya N, et al. Spleen in haematological malignancies: spectrum of imaging findings. Br J Radiol 2012;85:81-92   DOI
16 Ferrozzi F, Bova D, Draghi F, Garlaschi G. CT findings in primary vascular tumors of the spleen. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1996;166:1097-1101   DOI
17 Berland LL. Overview of white papers of the ACR incidental findings committee ii on adnexal, vascular, splenic, nodal, gallbladder, and biliary findings. J Am Coll Radiol 2013;10:672-674   DOI
18 Metser U, Miller E, Kessler A, Lerman H, Lievshitz G, Oren R, et al. Solid splenic masses: evaluation with 18F-FDG PET/CT. J Nucl Med 2005;46:52-59
19 Gaetke-Udager K, Wasnik AP, Kaza RK, Al-Hawary MM, Maturen KE, Udager AM, et al. Multimodality imaging of splenic lesions and the role of non-vascular, image-guided intervention. Abdom Imaging 2014;39:570-587   DOI
20 Elsayes KM, Narra VR, Mukundan G, Lewis JS Jr, Menias CO, Heiken JP. MR imaging of the spleen: spectrum of abnormalities. Radiographics 2005;25:967-982   DOI
21 Karlo CA, Stolzmann P, Do RK, Alkadhi H. Computed tomography of the spleen: how to interpret the hypodense lesion. Insights Imaging 2013;4:65-76   DOI
22 Warshauer DM, Hall HL. Solitary splenic lesions. Semin Ultrasound CT MR 2006;27:370-388   DOI
23 Pugalenthi A, Bradley C, Gonen M, Do KG, Strong V, Jarnagin W, et al. Splenectomy to treat splenic lesions: an analysis of 148 cases at a cancer center. J Surg Oncol 2013;108:521-525   DOI
24 Kamaya A, Weinstein S, Desser TS. Multiple lesions of the spleen: differential diagnosis of cystic and solid lesions. Semin Ultrasound CT MR 2006;27:389-403   DOI
25 Abbott RM, Levy AD, Aguilera NS, Gorospe L, Thompson WM. From the archives of the AFIP: primary vascular neoplasms of the spleen: radiologic-pathologic correlation. Radiographics 2004;24:1137-1163   DOI
26 Rabushka LS, Kawashima A, Fishman EK. Imaging of the spleen: CT with supplemental MR examination. Radiographics 1994;14:307-332   DOI