Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Magnetic resonance imaging follow-up of chondroid tumors: regression vs. progression

  • Scientific Article
  • Published:
Skeletal Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective

To present magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) evidence of the regression or progression of chondroid tumors and to investigate whether MRI can be used to predict the evolution of chondroid tumors.

Materials and methods

Twenty-one patients with enchondromas or atypical cartilaginous tumors who had undergone extremity MRI at least twice with a minimum 12-month interval between the MRIs were enrolled in this study. The diagnosis was based on the radiography and MRI findings. We classified the tumors into the following three groups according to changes between the MRIs: no change (NC), progression (P), and regression (R). We assessed the initial MRI features, including anatomical location, size, endosteal scalloping, peritumoral edema, fat entrapment, and direction of progression or regression. Nineteen of the 21 patients had contrast-enhanced images, and we analyzed the presence of atypical lobular enhancement against typical peripheral or septal enhancement.

Results

The R group comprised 11 cases (52%), the P group comprised five cases (24%), and the NC group comprised five cases (24%). None of the MRI features showed statistically significant differences among the groups. Atypical lobular enhancement was observed in the R (6 of 10, 60%) and NC (2 of 5, 40%) groups but not in the P group (0 of 4, 0%), although these differences were not statistically significant.

Conclusions

Chondroid tumors can either regress or progress in the MRI follow-up. Atypical lobular enhancement was seen only in stable or regressing tumors.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Stomp W, Reijnierse M, Kloppenburg M, de Mutsert R, Bovee JV, den Heijer M, et al. Prevalence of cartilaginous tumours as an incidental finding on MRI of the knee. Eur Radiol. 2015;25(12):3480–7.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Parlier-Cuau C, Bousson V, Ogilvie CM, Lackman RD, Laredo JD. When should we biopsy a solitary central cartilaginous tumor of long bones? Literature review and management proposal. Eur J Radiol. 2011;77(1):6–12.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Deckers C, Schreuder BH, Hannink G, de Rooy JW, van der Geest IC. Radiologic follow-up of untreated enchondroma and atypical cartilaginous tumors in the long bones. J Surg Oncol. 2016;114(8):987–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Jo VY, Doyle LA. Refinements in sarcoma classification in the current 2013 World Health Organization classification of tumours of soft tissue and bone. Surg Oncol Clin N Am. 2016;25(4):621–43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Crim J, Schmidt R, Layfield L, Hanrahan C, Manaster BJ. Can imaging criteria distinguish enchondroma from grade 1 chondrosarcoma? Eur J Radiol. 2015;84(11):2222–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Douis H, Saifuddin A. The imaging of cartilaginous bone tumours. I Benign lesions. Skelet Radiol. 2012;41(10):1195–212.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Douis H, Saifuddin A. The imaging of cartilaginous bone tumours. II Chondrosarcoma. Skelet Radiol. 2013;42(5):611–26.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Schwab JH, Wenger D, Unni K, Sim FH. Does local recurrence impact survival in low-grade chondrosarcoma of the long bones? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2007;462:175–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Altay M, Bayrakci K, Yildiz Y, Erekul S, Saglik Y. Secondary chondrosarcoma in cartilage bone tumors: report of 32 patients. J Orthop Sci. 2007;12(5):415–23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Sampath Kumar V, Tyrrell PN, Singh J, Gregory J, Cribb GL, Cool P. Surveillance of intramedullary cartilage tumours in long bones. Bone Joint J. 2016;98-B(11):1542–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Sensarma A, Madewell JE, Meis JM, Kumar R, Lin PP, Amini B. Regression of an enchondroma: a case report and proposed etiology. Skelet Radiol. 2015;44(5):739–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Yoo HJ, Hong SH, Choi JY, Moon KC, Kim HS, Choi JA, et al. Differentiating high-grade from low-grade chondrosarcoma with MR imaging. Eur Radiol. 2009;19(12):3008–14.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Murphey MD, Flemming DJ, Boyea SR, Bojescul JA, Sweet DE, Temple HT. Enchondroma versus chondrosarcoma in the appendicular skeleton: differentiating features. Radiographics. 1998;18(5):1213–37. quiz 1244-1215

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Herget GW, Strohm P, Rottenburger C, Kontny U, Krauss T, Bohm J, et al. Insights into enchondroma, enchondromatosis and the risk of secondary chondrosarcoma. Review of the literature with an emphasis on the clinical behaviour, radiology, malignant transformation and the follow up. Neoplasma. 2014;61(4):365–78.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Baruchin A, Rosenberg L, Itzchaki M. Spontaneous restitution ad integrum of a fractured enchondroma in a finger. Int J Tissue React. 1981;3(1):17–20.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Passanise AM, Mehlman CT, Wall EJ, Dieterle JP. Radiographic evidence of regression of a solitary osteochondroma: a report of 4 cases and a literature review. J Pediatr Orthop. 2011;31(3):312–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Hill CE, Boyce L, van der Ploeg ID. Spontaneous resolution of a solitary osteochondroma of the distal femur: a case report and review of the literature. J Pediatr Orthop B. 2014;23(1):73–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Hansford BG, Stacy GS. From tumor to trauma: etiologically deconstructing a unique differential diagnosis of musculoskeletal entities with high signal intensity on T1-weighted MRI. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2015;204(4):817–26.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Vanel D, Kreshak J, Larousserie F, Alberghini M, Mirra J, De Paolis M, et al. Enchondroma vs. chondrosarcoma: a simple, easy-to-use, new magnetic resonance sign. Eur J Radiol. 2013;82(12):2154–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Dirckx N, Van Hul M, Maes C. Osteoblast recruitment to sites of bone formation in skeletal development, homeostasis, and regeneration. Birth Defects Res C Embryo Today. 2013;99(3):170–91.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Ortega N, Behonick DJ, Werb Z. Matrix remodeling during endochondral ossification. Trends Cell Biol. 2004;14(2):86–93.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Brien EW, Mirra JM, Kerr R. Benign and malignant cartilage tumors of bone and joint: their anatomic and theoretical basis with an emphasis on radiology, pathology and clinical biology. I. The intramedullary cartilage tumors. Skelet Radiol. 1997;26(6):325–53.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Douis H, Davies AM, James SL, Kindblom LG, Grimer RJ, Johnson KJ. Can MR imaging challenge the commonly accepted theory of the pathogenesis of solitary enchondroma of long bone? Skelet Radiol. 2012;41(12):1537–42.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Amary MF, Bacsi K, Maggiani F, Damato S, Halai D, Berisha F, et al. IDH1 and IDH2 mutations are frequent events in central chondrosarcoma and central and periosteal chondromas but not in other mesenchymal tumours. J Pathol. 2011;224(3):334–43.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiology, Veterans Health Service Medical Center, 53, Jinhwangdo-ro 61-gil, Gangdong-gu, Seoul, 05368, Republic of Korea

    Bo Mi Chung

  2. Department of Radiology, Seoul National University Hospital, 101, Daehak-ro, Jongno-gu, Seoul, 03080, Republic of Korea

    Sung Hwan Hong, Hye Jin Yoo, Ja-Young Choi & Hee-Dong Chae

  3. Department of Radiology, SMG-SNU Boramae Medical Center, 20, Boramae-ro 5-gil, Dongjak-gu, Seoul, 07061, Republic of Korea

    Dong Hyun Kim

Authors
  1. Bo Mi Chung
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sung Hwan Hong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Hye Jin Yoo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Ja-Young Choi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Hee-Dong Chae
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Dong Hyun Kim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sung Hwan Hong.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Chung, B.M., Hong, S.H., Yoo, H.J. et al. Magnetic resonance imaging follow-up of chondroid tumors: regression vs. progression. Skeletal Radiol 47, 755–761 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00256-017-2834-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00256-017-2834-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation