Advertisement

Peripheral vascular lesions in adults referred to MRI/MRA: Multivariable analysis of imaging features to help differentiate benign vascular anomalies from malignancies

      Highlights

      • No single imaging feature reliably predicted malignancy (PPV ≤60%).
      • Absence of distinct soft tissue mass excluded malignancy (NPV 100%).
      • The five strongest predictors of malignancy were: T2 peaks, age ≥70 years, distinct soft tissue mass, lesion size ≥5 cm, and absence of septations.
      • 3 or more of these features resulted in sensitivity of 92% and specificity of 85%.

      Abstract

      Purpose

      Symptomatic peripheral vascular lesions in adults are often clinically diagnosed as benign vascular anomalies and may receive MRI/MRA for pre-treatment vascular mapping. Malignant neoplasms are difficult to distinguish from benign vascular anomalies on MRI/MRA. This study was performed to determine if there are imaging signs that can distinguish malignancies from benign vascular anomalies in adults imaged with MRI/MRA.

      Materials and methods

      A radiology database was retrospectively searched for ISSVA classification terms in MRI/MRA reports from 1/1/2002–1/1/2019. Adult patients (n = 50, 52 corresponding lesions) with contrast-enhanced MRI/MRA, peripheral soft tissue based lesion (s), and available pathology or long-term (>1 year) imaging follow-up were included. MRI/MRA images were reviewed by 3 readers for the following lesional characteristics: morphology (marginal lobulation, internal septations, distinct soft tissue mass), peri-articular location, T2-weighted characteristics (hyperintensity, heterogeneity, perilesional edema, and adjacent triangular T2-peaks), bulk fat, hemorrhage, enhancement pattern (peripheral, diffuse, or absent), neovascularity, low-flow venous malformation type enhancement, arterial enhancement within 6 s, enhancement curve (progressive, plateau, or washout), measured size, and multifocality. The MRI/MRA features' associated sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) were calculated. To identify factors predictive of malignancy, a two-stage multivariable analysis was performed.

      Results

      23% (12/52) of the lesions, corresponding to 22% (11/50) of the patients, were malignant neoplasms. No single imaging feature reliably predicted malignancy (PPV ≤ 60%). Absence of distinct soft tissue mass excluded malignancy (NPV 100%). Multivariate analysis derived a summary score based on the five strongest predictors of malignancy: adjacent T2 peaks, age ≥ 70 years, distinct soft tissue mass, lesion size ≥ 5 cm, and absence of septations. A score ≥ 3 resulted in sensitivity of 92% and specificity of 85%.

      Conclusion

      Extremity MRI/MRA rarely differentiates malignant from benign soft-tissue vascular tumors in adults. However, MRI/MRA can suggest malignancy when patient age and multiple imaging features are considered. Periodic clinical follow-up after the planned endovascular or operative procedure should be performed to avoid missing a malignancy.

      Keywords

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to Clinical Imaging
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Flors L.
        • Leiva-Salinas C.
        • Norton P.T.
        • Park A.W.
        • Ogur T.
        • Hagspiel K.D.
        Ten frequently asked questions about MRI evaluation of soft-tissue vascular anomalies.
        AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2013; 201 (W554-62)
        • Ng V.Y.
        • Scharschmidt T.J.
        • Mayerson J.L.
        • Fisher J.L.
        Incidence and survival in sarcoma in the United States: a focus on musculoskeletal lesions.
        Anticancer Res. 2013; 33: 2597-2604
        • Abrams H.L.G.J.-F.
        • Dake M.D.
        Wilkins L.W. Abrams’ Angiography: Interventional Radiology. 3rd ed. 2014: 1222 (Philadelphia)
        • Kramer U.
        • Ernemann U.
        • Fenchel M.
        • et al.
        Pretreatment evaluation of peripheral vascular malformations using low-dose contrast-enhanced time-resolved 3D MR angiography: initial results in 22 patients.
        AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2011; 196: 702-711
        • Cox J.A.
        • Bartlett E.
        • Lee E.I.
        Vascular malformations: a review.
        Semin Plast Surg. 2014; 28: 58-63
        • Eifert S.
        • Villavicencio J.L.
        • Kao T.C.
        • Taute B.M.
        • Rich N.M.
        Prevalence of deep venous anomalies in congenital vascular malformations of venous predominance.
        J Vasc Surg. 2000; 31: 462-471
        • Kim J.S.
        • Chandler A.
        • Borzykowski R.
        • Thornhill B.
        • Taragin B.H.
        Maximizing time-resolved MRA for differentiation of hemangiomas, vascular malformations and vascularized tumors.
        Pediatr Radiol. 2012; 42: 775-784
        • Dubois J.
        • Alison M.
        Vascular anomalies: what a radiologist needs to know.
        Pediatr Radiol. 2010; 40: 895-905
        • Chhabra A.
        • Soldatos T.
        Soft-tissue lesions: when can we exclude sarcoma?.
        AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2012; 199: 1345-1357
        • Teo E.L.
        • Strouse P.J.
        • Hernandez R.J.
        MR imaging differentiation of soft-tissue hemangiomas from malignant soft-tissue masses.
        AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2000; 174: 1623-1628
        • Guichet P.L.
        • Duszak Jr., R.
        • Chaves Cerdas L.
        • Hughes D.R.
        • Hindman N.
        • Rosenkrantz A.B.
        Changing national medicare utilization of catheter, computed tomography, and magnetic resonance extremity angiography: a specialty-focused 16-year analysis.
        Curr Probl Diagn Radiol. 2021; 50: 308-314
        • Moon M.
        • Cornfeld D.
        • Weinreb J.
        Dynamic contrast-enhanced breast MR imaging.
        Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am. 2009; 17: 351-362
        • Hong J.H.
        • Jee W.H.
        • Jung C.K.
        • Jung J.Y.
        • Shin S.H.
        • Chung Y.G.
        Soft tissue sarcoma: adding diffusion-weighted imaging improves MR imaging evaluation of tumor margin infiltration.
        Eur Radiol. 2019; 29: 2589-2597
        • Zhao F.
        • Ahlawat S.
        • Farahani S.J.
        • et al.
        Can MR imaging be used to predict tumor grade in soft-tissue sarcoma?.
        Radiology. 2014; 272: 192-201
        • Yoo H.J.
        • Hong S.H.
        • Kang Y.
        • et al.
        MR imaging of myxofibrosarcoma and undifferentiated sarcoma with emphasis on tail sign; diagnostic and prognostic value.
        Eur Radiol. 2014; 24: 1749-1757
        • van Rijswijk C.S.
        • Geirnaerdt M.J.
        • Hogendoorn P.C.
        • et al.
        Soft-tissue tumors: value of static and dynamic gadopentetate dimeglumine-enhanced MR imaging in prediction of malignancy.
        Radiology. 2004; 233: 493-502
        • Premat K.
        • Shotar E.
        • Burns R.
        • et al.
        Reliability and accuracy of time-resolved contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography in hypervascular spinal metastases prior embolization.
        Eur Radiol. 2021; 31: 4690-4699
        • Pillari G.
        • Lee W.J.
        • Kumari S.
        • et al.
        CT and angiographic correlates: surgical image of renal mass lesions.
        Urology. 1981; 17: 296-299
        • Berquist T.H.
        • Ehman R.L.
        • King B.F.
        • Hodgman C.G.
        • Ilstrup D.M.
        Value of MR imaging in differentiating benign from malignant soft-tissue masses: study of 95 lesions.
        AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1990; 155: 1251-1255
        • Crim J.R.
        • Seeger L.L.
        • Yao L.
        • Chandnani V.
        • Eckardt J.J.
        Diagnosis of soft-tissue masses with MR imaging: can benign masses be differentiated from malignant ones?.
        Radiology. 1992; 185: 581-586
        • Moulton J.S.
        • Blebea J.S.
        • Dunco D.M.
        • Braley S.E.
        • Bisset III, G.S.
        • Emery K.H.
        MR imaging of soft-tissue masses: diagnostic efficacy and value of distinguishing between benign and malignant lesions.
        AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1995; 164: 1191-1199