The sonographic "coffee bean" sign helps distinguish an axillary neurofibroma from a lymphadenopathy

Clinical and Sonographic Classification of Neurofibromas in Children with Neurofibromatosis Type 1 - A Cluster Analysis

PURPOSE

 High-frequency ultrasound allows the accurate identification of neurofibromas in neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1). This study aimed to analyze the ultrasound features of neurofibromas in children with NF1, to establish a classification based on the clinical and sonographic patterns of the different types of neurofibromas, and to evaluate the interobserver correlation coefficient (κ) of this classification.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

 In this prospective, single referral center observational study, clinical and ultrasound findings of neurofibromas in children diagnosed with NF 1 were analyzed. To identify the ultrasound patterns, a cluster analysis allowing the inclusion of both clinical and ultrasound data was designed. The κ coefficient was calculated using 9 external evaluators.

RESULTS

 265 ultrasound scans were performed on a total of 242 neurofibromas from 108 children diagnosed with NF1. Cluster analysis allowed the identification of 9 patterns (Snedecor's F, P < 0.001) classified as "classic" cutaneous neurofibroma, blue-red neurofibroma, pseudoatrophic neurofibroma, nodular subcutaneous neurofibroma, diffuse subcutaneous neurofibroma, congenital cutaneous neurofibroma, congenital plexiform neurofibroma, congenital diffuse and plexiform neurofibroma, and subfascial neurofibroma. The κ coefficient of the interobserver ratings was 0.82.

CONCLUSION

 Patterns identified in the cluster analysis allow neurofibromas to be classified with a very high interobserver correlation.

Nerve ultrasound

Objective:

To determine ultrasonographic peripheral nerve involvement in patients with asymptomatic neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1).

Methods:

Thirteen asymptomatic and 4 minimally symptomatic patients with NF1 were included in this cross-sectional pilot study to detect asymptomatic abnormalities of the brachial plexus and upper and lower extremity nerves. Patients underwent clinical examination, nerve conduction studies (NCS), and high-resolution ultrasonography (HRUS).

Results:

HRUS showed abnormalities in 16 patients (94.1%). Neurofibromas were identified in 10 patients (58.8%): localized neurofibromas were found in 3 patients (17.6%), plexiform neurofibromas in 3 (17.6%), and both in 4 (23.5%). In 6 patients (35.3%), only nerve enlargement without an abnormal fascicular pattern was observed. Severe involvement of the peripheral nervous system with multiple plexiform neurofibromas was observed in 7 patients (41.2%), while 4 patients (23.5%) had no or only minor involvement. Both NCS and HRUS were performed on 73 individual nerve segments. In 5.5%, abnormalities were found with both tests; in 50.7%, only with HRUS; and in 1.4%, only with NCS.

Conclusions:

HRUS frequently showed subclinical involvement of the peripheral nerves in NF1, also when NCS were normal. HRUS findings ranged from normal to widespread peripheral nerve involvement. Because the presence of plexiform neurofibromas and the benign tumor load are risk factors for the development of a malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumor, HRUS may be a useful tool to identify a subgroup of patients who could benefit from regular follow-up.