Volume 21, Issue 1 (Iranian South Medical Journal 2018)                   Iran South Med J 2018, 21(1): 54-64 | Back to browse issues page

XML Persian Abstract Print

Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Aghaghazvini L, Sharifian H, Omidi S, Yazdani N, Kooraki S. Diagnostic Value of Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy in Differentiation of Benign and Malignant Salivary Gland Tumors in Comparison with Pathology Results. Iran South Med J 2018; 21 (1) :54-64
URL: http://ismj.bpums.ac.ir/article-1-914-en.html
1- Department of radiology, Shariati Hospital, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran , aghaghazvini.leila@gmail.com
2- Department of radiology, Amiralam Hospital, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
3- Advanced Diagnostic and invasive imaging research center, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
4- ENT research center, Amiralam Hospital, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
Abstract:   (6466 Views)
Background: Differentiation between benign and malignant parotid tumors before surgery is important because it can change the treatment plan for patients. We evaluated the role of magnetic resonance spectroscopy (MRS) for differentiating benign from malignant parotid tumors.
Materials and Methods: Forty patients with salivary gland tumor especially parotid, who were candidate for surgery, were enrolled. Patients were selected in Amiralam Hospital and underwent MRI in Imam Khomeini Hospital in Tehran. Magnetic resonance spectroscopy (MRS) was performed at 135 and 270 time of echo (TE), and the choline/creatine ratio was determined. The cytological results were used to divide the patients into warthin, benign and malignant groups and ROC curves were used to determine the best cut off points.
Results: Forty patients entered this study, 25 had benign non-warthin tumors, nine had malignant tumors and six had warthin tumors. TE:136 was stronger for differentiating benign from malignant tumors. The best cutoff point for choline/creatine ratio was 1.92 in TE:136 with a sensitivity of 81% and a specificity of 89% and 1.76 in TE:270 with a sensitivity of 89% and a specificity of 71%.  Choline/creatine ratio <1.25 can rule out malignancy with a sensitivity of 92% and ratio > 1.76 strongly suggests malignancy with a specificity of 10%. MRS was not able to differentiate benign non-warthin from warthin tumors.
Conclusion: According to the present study, choline/creatine ratio in MRS is a noninvasive method that can be used for differentiating benign from malignant tumors.
Full-Text [PDF 498 kb]   (2891 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Original | Subject: Radiology. Diagnostic Imaging
Received: 2016/08/29 | Accepted: 2017/10/8 | Published: 2018/02/26

1. Rastogi R, Bhargava S, Janardan Mallarajapatna G, et al. Pictorial essay: Salivary gland imaging, Indian J Radiol Imaging 2012; 22(4): 325-33. [DOI:10.4103/0971-3026.111487]
2. Divi V, Fatt MA, Teknos TN, et al. Use of cross-sectionalimaging in predicting surgical location of parotid neoplasms. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2005; 29: 315-19. [DOI:10.1097/01.rct.0000161758.25130.34]
3. Freling NJ, Molenaar WM, Vermey A, et al. Malignant parotid tumors: clinical use of MR imaging and histologic correlation. Radiology 1992;. 185(3): 691-6 [DOI:10.1148/radiology.185.3.1438746]
4. Witten J, Hybert F, Hansen HS. Treatment of malignant tumors in the parotid glands. Cancer 1990; 65(11): 2515-20. https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-0142(19900601)65:11<2515::AID-CNCR2820651121>3.0.CO;2-B [DOI:10.1002/1097-0142(19900601)65:113.0.CO;2-B]
5. Gritzmann N, Rettenbacher T, Hollerweger A, et al. Sonography of the salivary glands. Eur Radiol 2003;13(5): 964-75. [DOI:10.1007/s00330-002-1586-9]
6. Yousem DM, Kraut MA, Chalian AA. Major salivary gland imaging. Radiology 2000; 216(1): 19-29. [DOI:10.1148/radiology.216.1.r00jl4519]
7. Parker GD, Harnsberger HR. Clinical-radiologic issues in perineural tumor spread of malignant diseases of the extracranialhead and neck. Radi-ographics 1991; 11(3): 383-99. [DOI:10.1148/radiographics.11.3.1852933]
8. Motoori K, Yamamoto S, Ueda T. et al. Inter- and intratumoral variability in magnetic resonance imaging of pleomorphic adenoma: an attempt to interpret the variable magnetic resonance findings. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2004; 28(2): 233-46. [DOI:10.1097/00004728-200403000-00014]
9. Vogl TJ, Balzer J, Grevers G. Magnetic resonance tomography in questionable lesions of the ENT area. Examination technique and results of a prospective study of 1,493 patients. Laryngorhinootologie 1992; 71(9): 439-52. [DOI:10.1055/s-2007-997331]
10. Yabuuchi H, Fukuya T, Tajima T, et al. Salivary gland tumors: diagnostic value of gadoliniumenhanced dynamic MR imaging with histopathologiccorrelation.Radiology 2003; 226(2): 345-54. [DOI:10.1148/radiol.2262011486]
11. Aghaghazvini L, Salahshur F, Yazdani N, et al. Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI for differentiation of major salivary glands neoplasms, a 3-T MRI study. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2015; 44(2): 20140166. [DOI:10.1259/dmfr.20140166]
12. Habermann CR, Gossrau P, Graessner J et al. Diffusion-weighted echo-planar MRI: a valuable tool for differentiating primary parotid gland tumors? RoFo 2005; 177(7): 940-5. [DOI:10.1055/s-2005-858297]
13. King AD, Yeung DK, Ahuja AT. et al. Salivary gland tumors at in vivo proton MR spectroscopy. Radiology 2005; 237(2): 563-9. [DOI:10.1148/radiol.2372041309]
14. Nakahari T, Seo Y, Murakami M, et al. 31P-NMR study of dog submandibular gland in vivo and in vitro using the topical magnetic resonance. Jpn J Physiol. 1985;35(5):729-40. [DOI:10.2170/jjphysiol.35.729]
15. Murakami M, Imai Y, Seo Y, et al. Phospho-rus nuclear magnetic resonance of perfused sal-ivary gland. BiochimBiophysActa. 1983: 16(726): 19-24. [DOI:10.1016/0167-4889(83)90111-8]
16. Horská A, Peter B, Barker D.et al. Imaging of Brain Tumors: MR Spectroscopy and Metabolic Imaging. Neuroimaging Clin N Am. 2010; 20(3): 293-310. [DOI:10.1016/j.nic.2010.04.003]
17. Okada T, Harada M, Matsuzaki K, et al. Evaluation of female intrapelvic tumors by clinical proton MR spectroscopy. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2001;13(6):912-17. [DOI:10.1002/jmri.1130]
18. Thomas MA, Binesh N, Yue K, et al. Volume-localized two-dimensional correlated magnetic resonance spectroscopy of human breast cancer. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2001;14(2):181-6. [DOI:10.1002/jmri.1170]
19. Hahn P, Smith IC, Leboldus L, Littman C, Somorjai RL, Bezabeh T. The classification of benign and malignant human prostate tissue by multivariate analysis of 1H magnetic resonance spectra. Cancer Res. 1997; 57(16):3398-3401.
20. Gupta N, Kakar AK, Chowdhury V, et al. Magnetic resonance spectroscopy as a diagnostic modality for carcinoma thyroid. Eur J Radiol. 2007;64(3): 414-18. [DOI:10.1016/j.ejrad.2007.03.006]

Send email to the article author

Rights and Permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

© 2024 CC BY-NC 4.0 | Iranian South Medical Journal

Designed & Developed by: Yektaweb