Differentiation of spinal giant cell tumors from chordomas by using a scoring system

Takashi Tsuji, Kazuhiro Chiba, Kota Watanabe, Ken Ishii, Masaya Nakamura, Yuji Nishiwaki, Morio Matsumoto

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Introduction: Few reports have compared the clinical features and imaging characteristics of giant cell tumor and chordoma of the spine. The aim of the present study was to investigate whether the two types of tumors could be differentially diagnosed, by comparing clinical characteristics as well as magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) or computed tomography (CT) findings and then scoring the characteristic findings. Methods: A total of 18 patients were retrospectively assessed. To elucidate the characteristic findings, we investigated the following 10 items: age at diagnosis, sex, and site of occurrence; for MRI findings, the pattern of tumor expansion, T1-weighted images, T2-weighted images, septal structure, and cystic changes; and for CT findings, calcification or residual bone fragments and incomplete bone shells. Then, we developed a unique scoring system and investigated whether the two tumors could be differentiated by this scoring system. Results: Six items, including, age, site of occurrence, tumor expansion pattern, T2-weighted images, septal structure, and incomplete bone shells, were significantly different between giant cell tumor and chordoma patients. By using newly developed scoring system, the mean scores of 0.9 ± 0.6 (range 0–2) for giant cell tumor and 4.8 ± 1.5 (range 3–6) for chordoma patients were significantly different (P < 0.001), thereby allowing the differential diagnosis by setting the cutoff value to three. Conclusions: We found that the six items were useful for differentially diagnosing giant cell tumor and chordoma. These results indicate that it may be possible to distinguish the two types of tumor by scoring these items.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)779-784
Number of pages6
JournalEuropean Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Traumatology
Volume26
Issue number7
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 01-10-2016
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Chordoma
Giant Cell Tumors
Neoplasms
Bone and Bones
Tomography
Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Spine
Differential Diagnosis

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Surgery
  • Orthopedics and Sports Medicine

Cite this

Tsuji, Takashi ; Chiba, Kazuhiro ; Watanabe, Kota ; Ishii, Ken ; Nakamura, Masaya ; Nishiwaki, Yuji ; Matsumoto, Morio. / Differentiation of spinal giant cell tumors from chordomas by using a scoring system. In: European Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Traumatology. 2016 ; Vol. 26, No. 7. pp. 779-784.
@article{058e25ef534a4e6f913335cd2469ea32,
title = "Differentiation of spinal giant cell tumors from chordomas by using a scoring system",
abstract = "Introduction: Few reports have compared the clinical features and imaging characteristics of giant cell tumor and chordoma of the spine. The aim of the present study was to investigate whether the two types of tumors could be differentially diagnosed, by comparing clinical characteristics as well as magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) or computed tomography (CT) findings and then scoring the characteristic findings. Methods: A total of 18 patients were retrospectively assessed. To elucidate the characteristic findings, we investigated the following 10 items: age at diagnosis, sex, and site of occurrence; for MRI findings, the pattern of tumor expansion, T1-weighted images, T2-weighted images, septal structure, and cystic changes; and for CT findings, calcification or residual bone fragments and incomplete bone shells. Then, we developed a unique scoring system and investigated whether the two tumors could be differentiated by this scoring system. Results: Six items, including, age, site of occurrence, tumor expansion pattern, T2-weighted images, septal structure, and incomplete bone shells, were significantly different between giant cell tumor and chordoma patients. By using newly developed scoring system, the mean scores of 0.9 ± 0.6 (range 0–2) for giant cell tumor and 4.8 ± 1.5 (range 3–6) for chordoma patients were significantly different (P < 0.001), thereby allowing the differential diagnosis by setting the cutoff value to three. Conclusions: We found that the six items were useful for differentially diagnosing giant cell tumor and chordoma. These results indicate that it may be possible to distinguish the two types of tumor by scoring these items.",
author = "Takashi Tsuji and Kazuhiro Chiba and Kota Watanabe and Ken Ishii and Masaya Nakamura and Yuji Nishiwaki and Morio Matsumoto",
year = "2016",
month = "10",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1007/s00590-016-1819-2",
language = "English",
volume = "26",
pages = "779--784",
journal = "European Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Traumatology",
issn = "0948-4817",
publisher = "Springer Verlag",
number = "7",

}

Differentiation of spinal giant cell tumors from chordomas by using a scoring system. / Tsuji, Takashi; Chiba, Kazuhiro; Watanabe, Kota; Ishii, Ken; Nakamura, Masaya; Nishiwaki, Yuji; Matsumoto, Morio.

In: European Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Traumatology, Vol. 26, No. 7, 01.10.2016, p. 779-784.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Differentiation of spinal giant cell tumors from chordomas by using a scoring system

AU - Tsuji, Takashi

AU - Chiba, Kazuhiro

AU - Watanabe, Kota

AU - Ishii, Ken

AU - Nakamura, Masaya

AU - Nishiwaki, Yuji

AU - Matsumoto, Morio

PY - 2016/10/1

Y1 - 2016/10/1

N2 - Introduction: Few reports have compared the clinical features and imaging characteristics of giant cell tumor and chordoma of the spine. The aim of the present study was to investigate whether the two types of tumors could be differentially diagnosed, by comparing clinical characteristics as well as magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) or computed tomography (CT) findings and then scoring the characteristic findings. Methods: A total of 18 patients were retrospectively assessed. To elucidate the characteristic findings, we investigated the following 10 items: age at diagnosis, sex, and site of occurrence; for MRI findings, the pattern of tumor expansion, T1-weighted images, T2-weighted images, septal structure, and cystic changes; and for CT findings, calcification or residual bone fragments and incomplete bone shells. Then, we developed a unique scoring system and investigated whether the two tumors could be differentiated by this scoring system. Results: Six items, including, age, site of occurrence, tumor expansion pattern, T2-weighted images, septal structure, and incomplete bone shells, were significantly different between giant cell tumor and chordoma patients. By using newly developed scoring system, the mean scores of 0.9 ± 0.6 (range 0–2) for giant cell tumor and 4.8 ± 1.5 (range 3–6) for chordoma patients were significantly different (P < 0.001), thereby allowing the differential diagnosis by setting the cutoff value to three. Conclusions: We found that the six items were useful for differentially diagnosing giant cell tumor and chordoma. These results indicate that it may be possible to distinguish the two types of tumor by scoring these items.

AB - Introduction: Few reports have compared the clinical features and imaging characteristics of giant cell tumor and chordoma of the spine. The aim of the present study was to investigate whether the two types of tumors could be differentially diagnosed, by comparing clinical characteristics as well as magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) or computed tomography (CT) findings and then scoring the characteristic findings. Methods: A total of 18 patients were retrospectively assessed. To elucidate the characteristic findings, we investigated the following 10 items: age at diagnosis, sex, and site of occurrence; for MRI findings, the pattern of tumor expansion, T1-weighted images, T2-weighted images, septal structure, and cystic changes; and for CT findings, calcification or residual bone fragments and incomplete bone shells. Then, we developed a unique scoring system and investigated whether the two tumors could be differentiated by this scoring system. Results: Six items, including, age, site of occurrence, tumor expansion pattern, T2-weighted images, septal structure, and incomplete bone shells, were significantly different between giant cell tumor and chordoma patients. By using newly developed scoring system, the mean scores of 0.9 ± 0.6 (range 0–2) for giant cell tumor and 4.8 ± 1.5 (range 3–6) for chordoma patients were significantly different (P < 0.001), thereby allowing the differential diagnosis by setting the cutoff value to three. Conclusions: We found that the six items were useful for differentially diagnosing giant cell tumor and chordoma. These results indicate that it may be possible to distinguish the two types of tumor by scoring these items.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84979520485&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84979520485&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s00590-016-1819-2

DO - 10.1007/s00590-016-1819-2

M3 - Article

C2 - 27449029

AN - SCOPUS:84979520485

VL - 26

SP - 779

EP - 784

JO - European Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Traumatology

JF - European Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Traumatology

SN - 0948-4817

IS - 7

ER -