Logo

The Role of Imaging for Characterization of Incidental Splenic Lesions

Authors:
Alireza AbrishamiAlireza AbrishamiAlireza Abrishami ORCID1,*, Soheil KoorakiSoheil Kooraki1, Lars GrenacherLars Grenacher2, Hans-Ulrich KauczorHans-Ulrich Kauczor3
1Department of Radiology, Shariati Hospital, Tehran University of Medical Science
2Diagnostic Imaging Center, Diagnostik Muenchen, Mnchen, Germany
3Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital, Heid


IJ Radiology:Vol. 14, issue Special Issue; e48029
Published online:Apr 12, 2017
Article type:Abstract
Received:Dec 20, 2016
Accepted:Feb 07, 2017
How to Cite:Alireza AbrishamiSoheil KoorakiLars GrenacherHans-Ulrich KauczorThe Role of Imaging for Characterization of Incidental Splenic Lesions.14(Special Issue):e48029.https://doi.org/10.5812/iranjradiol.48029.

Abstract

Background:

With ever-increasing use of cross-sectional imaging, radiologists face with the challenge of characterizing incidental splenic lesions. Currently there is no guideline to manage these lesions. This study was conducted to characterize the incidental splenic lesions on cross-sectional imaging and to assess the role of various imaging factors to differentiate benign from malignant lesions.

Methods:

This retrospective study was performed in a tertiary referral center. Data of patients with incidental spleen lesions in their cross sectional imaging were assessed. Over a course of three years, one hundred sixty one patients were included. Follow-up imaging was available in 122 individuals with mean (SD) follow-up time of 16.4 (16) months (ranged 1 - 96 months). Patients demographic data, morphologic features and enhancement pattern on available CT scan and MRI were carefully reviewed and compared.

Results:

Of 161 patients with splenic lesion [54% male, mean age (SD): 59.7 (15.4). ranged: 8-88 yr], 134 (83.2%) were solitary and 89 (55.3%) were subcapsular. Benign lesions were more likely to be homogenous (59.7% vs. 29.7%, P: 0.002). Ill define and lobulated borders had significantly higher prevalence in malignant lesions (73% vs. 53.2%, P: 0.03). Malignant lesions had significantly larger size (21.7 vs. 15.5 mm, P: 0.03). None of the benign lesions showed restricted diffusion in DWI/ADC, while 50% of malignant lesions had restriction (P: 0.003). Stable lesion size in follow-up imaging was strongly associated with benign nature of the lesion (86.2% vs. 11.4 P < 0.001). Lesion distribution, Hounsfield unit (HU) and enhancement pattern on imaging were not strong enough to differentiate benign from malignant lesions.

Conclusions:

Small size, smooth lesion border and homogeneity favor benign nature of the incidental splenic lesions, while restricted diffusion might be a feature of malignancy. Follow-up imaging might be helpful in a subset of patients to discriminate benign and malignant incidental splenic lesions.

Full Text

Full text is available in PDF

comments

Leave a comment here


Crossmark
Crossmark
Checking
Share on
Cited by
Metrics

Purchasing Reprints

  • Copyright Clearance Center (CCC) handles bulk orders for article reprints for Brieflands. To place an order for reprints, please click here (   https://www.copyright.com/landing/reprintsinquiryform/ ). Clicking this link will bring you to a CCC request form where you can provide the details of your order. Once complete, please click the ‘Submit Request’ button and CCC’s Reprints Services team will generate a quote for your review.
Search Relations

Author(s):

Related Articles