Diagnosis of solitary eosinophilic granuloma by CT, MRI, and 18F-FDG PET/CT: two clinical cases

Pavel B. Gelezhe; Гележе Павел Борисович; Dmitriy V. Bulanov; Буланов Дмитрий Владимирович

doi:10.17816/DD59690

2例证实的孤立性嗜酸性肉芽肿 CT、MRI和18F-FDG PET/CT成像

作者: Gelezhe P.¹^,2, Bulanov D.²^,3
隶属关系:
1. Moscow Center for Diagnostics and Telemedicine
2. Joint-Stock Company “European Medical Center”
3. The Russian National Research Medical University named after N.I. Pirogov
期: 卷 2, 编号 1 (2021)
页面: 75-82
栏目: 临床病例及临床病例的系列
URL: https://journals.rcsi.science/DD/article/view/59690
DOI: https://doi.org/10.17816/DD59690
ID: 59690

如何引用文章

全文:

详细
全文:
作者简介
参考
补充文件
统计

详细

本文介绍计算机诊断嗜酸性骨肉芽肿、磁共振和18F氟脱氧葡萄糖正电子发射断层扫描以及计算机断层扫描的两个临床观察。根据综合的放射学诊断研究和组织学证实，确诊为孤立性嗜酸性肉芽肿，两例患者都因怀疑原发性恶性骨肿瘤而入院。孤立性嗜酸性肉芽肿是一种相当罕见的疾病（不到1%的骨骼肿瘤体积形成病例）。最常见的是，嗜酸性肉芽肿见于头骨的顶骨和额骨，是一种溶骨体积的形成，逐渐增大。虽然大多数骨肿瘤可以通过X线摄影发现，计算机体层摄影术是首选，主要是因为它能很好地显示骨皮质层的破坏情况。计算机断层扫描和磁共振成像的诊断准确性可能不同。辐射和放射性核素诊断方法的复杂应用使能够缩小鉴别诊断的范围。在大多数病例中，现有的放射学诊断研究的特异性较低，不能做出准确的诊断，选择的方法仍然是活检后进行病理形态学检查。这些临床观察表明，当发现孤立的溶骨性病灶时，鉴别诊断需要包括嗜酸性肉芽肿。

关键词

嗜酸性肉芽肿, 溶骨性病灶, 计算机断层扫描, 磁共振成像, 正电子发射断层扫描, 临床病例

全文:

##article.viewOnOriginalSite##

作者简介

Pavel Gelezhe

Moscow Center for Diagnostics and Telemedicine; Joint-Stock Company “European Medical Center”

编辑信件的主要联系方式.
Email: gelezhe.pavel@gmail.com
ORCID iD: 0000-0003-1072-2202
SPIN 代码: 4841-3234

俄罗斯联邦, 28-1, Srednyaya Kalitnikovskaya street, Moscow, 109029; Moscow

Dmitriy Bulanov

Joint-Stock Company “European Medical Center”; The Russian National Research Medical University named after N.I. Pirogov

Email: dbulanov@emcmos.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0001-7968-6778
SPIN 代码: 4641-1505

MD, Cand. Sci. (Med.)

俄罗斯联邦, Moscow; Moscow

参考

Lam KY. Langerhans cell histiocytosis (histiocytosis X). Postgrad Med J. 1997;73(861):391–394. doi: 10.1136/pgmj.73.861.391
Herzog KM, Tubbs RR. Langerhans cell histiocytosis. Adv Anat Pathol. 1998;5(6):347–358. doi: 10.1097/00125480-199811000-00001
Arseni C, Dănăilă L, Constantinescu A. Cranial eosinophilic granuloma. Neurochirurgia (Stuttg). 1977;20(6):189–199. doi: 10.1055/s-0028-1090377
Ardekian L, Peled M, Rosen D, et al. Clinical and radiographic features of eosinophilic granuloma in the jaws: Review of 41 lesions treated by surgery and low-dose radiotherapy. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 1999;87(2):238–242. doi: 10.1016/s1079-2104(99)70279-9
Willatt JM, Quaghebeur G. Calvarial masses of infants and children. A radiological approach. Clin Radiol. 2004;59(6):474–486. doi: 10.1016/j.crad.2003.12.006
Ginat DT, Mangla R, Yeaney G, et al. Diffusion-Weighted imaging for differentiating benign from malignant skull lesions and correlation with cell density. Am J Roentgenol. 2012;198(6):W597–W601. doi: 10.2214/AJR.11.7424
Davies AM, Pikoulas C, Griffith J. MRI of eosinophilic granuloma. Eur J Radiol. 1994;18(3):205–209. doi: 10.1016/0720-048x(94)90335-2
Dimitrakopoulou-Strauss A, Strauss LG, Heichel T, et al. The role of quantitative 18F-FDG PET studies for the differentiation of malignant and benign bone lesions. J Nucl Med. 2002;43(4):510–518.
Culverwell AD, Scarsbrook AF, Chowdhury FU. False-positive uptake on 2-[18F]-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose (FDG) positron-emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/ CT) in oncological imaging. Clin Radiol. 2011;66(4):366–382. doi: 10.1016/j.crad.2010.12.004
Schulte M, Brecht-Krauss D, Heymer B, et al. Grading of tumors and tumorlike lesions of bone: evaluation by FDG PET. J Nucl Med. 2000;41(10):1695–1701.
Martinez-Lage JF, Poza M, Cartagena J, et al. Solitary eosinophilic granuloma of the pediatric skull and spine ― the role of surgery. Childs Nerv Syst. 1991;7(8):448–451. doi: 10.1007/BF00263187
Oliveira M, Steinbok P, Wu J, et al. Spontaneous resolution of calvarial eosinophilic granuloma in children. Pediatr Neurosurg. 2003;38(5):247–252. doi: 10.1159/000069828
Rawlings CE, Wilkins RH. Solitary eosinophilic granuloma of the skull. Neurosurgery. 1984;15(2):155–161. doi: 10.1227/00006123-198408000-00001