Keywords:
CNS, Neuroradiology brain, Oncology, MR, Diagnostic procedure, Neoplasia
Authors:
J. F. Landa Pake1, A. Pons Escoda2, P. Naval Baudin3, A. Guell Bara4, I. RODRIGUEZ CAAMAÑO2, I. Oronoz Mitxelena2, C. Aguilera Grijalvo2, C. Majós2; 1L'Hospitalet de Llobregat/ES, 2Barcelona/ES, 3L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, Barcelona/ES, 4Tarragona/ES
DOI:
10.26044/ecr2019/C-2458
Aims and objectives
Despite advanced imaging techniques refinements in recent years,
the morphologic MR remains the standard for neuro-oncology diagnostic and follow-up.
There is a list of image criteria to help differentiate the nature of the commonest brain tumors in adults: metastasis (mets) and glioblastoma (GB).
Table 1, Fig. 1, Fig. 2
Even so,
the differential is still a frequent dilemma in everyday practice at the neuro-oncology units,
with great implications in patient’s initial diagnosis and subsequently adequate treatment which can differ substantially.
In our experience,
when both mets and GB exhibit similar characteristics,
we observed that the mets often show a thin T2-weighted hyperintense rim between tumor margins and parenchymal vasogenic edema; we called this imaging feature “T2-parenchymal cleft sign”.
Fig. 3
The aim of this work is to retrospectively analyze the diagnostic usefulness of this sign.