Diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound-guided core biopsy of peripheral nerve sheath tumors

Diagnosis and Treatment of Peripheral and Cranial Nerve Tumors with Expert Recommendations: An EUropean Network for RAre CANcers (EURACAN) Initiative

The 2021 WHO classification of the CNS Tumors identifies as "Peripheral nerve sheath tumors" (PNST) some entities with specific clinical and anatomical characteristics, histological and molecular markers, imaging findings, and aggressiveness. The Task Force has reviewed the evidence of diagnostic and therapeutic interventions, which is particularly low due to the rarity, and drawn recommendations accordingly. Tumor diagnosis is primarily based on hematoxylin and eosin-stained sections and immunohistochemistry. Molecular analysis is not essential to establish the histological nature of these tumors, although genetic analyses on DNA extracted from PNST (neurofibromas/schwannomas) is required to diagnose mosaic forms of NF1 and SPS. MRI is the gold-standard to delineate the extension with respect to adjacent structures. Gross-total resection is the first choice, and can be curative in benign lesions; however, the extent of resection must be balanced with preservation of nerve functioning. Radiotherapy can be omitted in benign tumors after complete resection and in NF-related tumors, due to the theoretic risk of secondary malignancies in a tumor-suppressor syndrome. Systemic therapy should be considered in incomplete resected plexiform neurofibromas/MPNSTs. MEK inhibitor selumetinib can be used in NF1 children ≥2 years with inoperable/symptomatic plexiform neurofibromas, while anthracycline-based treatment is the first choice for unresectable/locally advanced/metastatic MPNST. Clinical trials on other MEK1-2 inhibitors alone or in combination with mTOR inhibitors are under investigation in plexiform neurofibromas and MPNST, respectively.

Non-Vascular Considerations When Interpreting Extremity Arterial and Venous Examinations

Peripheral arterial and venous examinations are performed regularly in vascular labs and interpreted by physicians of different specialities. Many vascular examinations have nonvascular pathology that is either inadvertently imaged by the sonographer or imaged with intent as it relates to patient's symptoms. It is prudent for every reader of vascular studies to be acquainted with the sonographic appearance of these non-vascular lesions to enable appropriate and optimal interpretation that has a direct bearing on patient's clinical care. Our review includes a discussion of the nonvascular pathologies like lymph nodes, soft tissue edema, soft tissue fluid collections, musculotendinous injuries, soft tissue masses, and joint and bursal pathologies that may be encountered during interpretation of vascular exams. The pictorial essay includes a discussion of their sonographic appearances and pitfalls in interpretation. Multiple illustrative examples and sonographic images of the non-vascular pathologies found during interpretation of vascular studies have been utilized to highlight their appearances.

Qualitative Diagnosis of Liver Tumors Based on Ultrasound-Guided Automatic Biopsy

The goal of this study was to see if automatic biopsy guided by ultrasound could be used to provide a qualitative diagnosis of a liver tumor. Methods. A total of 40 patients (101 focuses) were treated with automatic liver parenchyma biopsy under ultrasound guidance, and the correlation between pathological outcomes and ultrasound images was investigated. The lesion size in the observation group was compared to that in the control group using conventional ultrasound (P > 0.05), and there was no significant difference. Under contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS), there was no statistically significant difference in lesion size between the observation and control groups (P > 0.05). The difference in lesion size between the conventional ultrasonography and CEUS observation groups was statistically significant (P 0.05). Conclusion. Ultrasound-guided automated biopsy of the liver parenchyma is a simple and effective procedure with fewer problems and a high diagnostic rate, and it deserves to be promoted clinically.

Morphology of the entering and exiting nerve as a differentiating feature of benign from malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumours of the brachial plexus

OBJECTIVE

To identify if morphology of the entering and exiting nerve involved by a nerve sheath tumour in the brachial plexus can help differentiate between benign (B) and malignant (M) peripheral nerve sheath tumours (PNSTs).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Retrospective review of 85 patients with histologically confirmed primary PNSTs of the brachial plexus over a 12.5-year period. Clinical data and all available MRI studies were independently evaluated by 2 consultant musculoskeletal radiologists blinded to the final histopathological diagnosis assessing for maximal lesion dimension, visibility and morphology of the entering and exiting nerve, and other well-documented features of PNSTs.

RESULTS

The study included 47 males and 38 females with mean age 46.7 years (range, 8-81 years). There were 73 BPNSTs and 12 MPNSTs. The entering nerve was not identified in 5 (7%), was normal in 17 (23%), was tapered in 38 (52%) and showed lobular enlargement in 13 (18%) BPNSTs compared with 0 (0%), 0 (0%), 2 (17%) and 10 (83%) MPNSTs respectively. The exiting nerve was not identified in 5 (7%), was normal in 20 (27%), was tapered in 42 (58%) and showed lobular enlargement in 6 (8%) BPNSTs compared with 4 (33%), 0 (0%), 2 (17%) and 6 (50%) MPNSTs respectively. Increasing tumour size, entering and exiting nerve morphology and suspected MRI diagnosis were statistically significant differentiators between BPNST and MPNST (p < 0.001). IOC for nerve status was poor to fair but improved to good if normal/tapered appearance were considered together with improved specificity of 81-91% for BPNST and sensitivity of 75-83%.

CONCLUSIONS

Morphology of the adjacent nerve is a useful additional MRI feature for distinguishing BPNST from MPNST of the brachial plexus.

Percutaneous image-guided biopsy in malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumors

BACKGROUND

The decision to biopsy a peripheral nerve tumor is largely based on its presumed behavior and prognosis, determined by patient history, clinical exam, and radiologic characteristics. Percutaneous image-guided biopsy is not without risk in patients with malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumors (MPNSTs); in particular, there may be concern regarding worsening neurologic function, increasing neuropathic pain, and incorrect or absent diagnosis.

METHODS

Following approval by our institutional review board, we reviewed records from 1990 to 2019 at our institution's three main sites ("our institution"). Patients with pathology-proven MPNST were selected. Further inclusion criteria included image-guided percutaneous biopsy performed at our institution, pathology report available for review, and follow-up documentation to determine post-biopsy complications.

RESULTS

Three hundred thirty-one patients with MPNST were reviewed. In total, 73 patients undergoing image-guided percutaneous biopsies were included. Twenty-two (30.1%) had biopsy-related complications. This included ten patients with misdiagnosis (13.7%) and six patients with non-diagnostic biopsies (8.2%). Six patients had new or worsened pain that resolved with time and neuropathic pain medication (8.2%), and one patient had subjectively worsened proximal weakness (1.3%) which resolved.

CONCLUSION

We found nearly a third of patients undergoing biopsy had a biopsy-related complication. The single largest complication was the inability to obtain an accurate diagnosis (21.9%) with the first biopsy. This may lead to the need for repeat percutaneous or open biopsies, or a non-oncologic initial surgery with implications for disease-free and overall survival. Neurologic complications including exacerbation of pain or a deficit were rare and transient. It remains important that clinicians balance the potential risks and benefits based on individual patient characteristics when determining the necessity of an image-guided percutaneous biopsy.

Image-guided percutaneous biopsy of peripheral nerve tumors of indeterminate nature: risks and benefits

BACKGROUND

Usual management of peripheral nerve tumors is to avoid biopsy in those that are likely benign; the risk of biopsy outweighs the benefit of definitive tissue diagnosis. Biopsy of presumed malignant lesions is performed widely. There is a subset of peripheral nerve tumors that are not easily categorized as benign or malignant based on the clinical and/or radiological features alone. The role of biopsy in peripheral nerve tumors of uncertain character remains controversial and the risk of biopsy (and the potential risk/benefit ratio) for these lesions is not known.

METHODS

Following approval by our institutional review board, we reviewed all notes of a single peripheral nerve surgeon from 2000 to 2018 with respect to image-guided percutaneous biopsy of nerve tumors. We divided these patients into 3 groups based on clinicoradiologic features. We determined the risk of complications and the "hit rate" for patients with peripheral nerve tumors of uncertain behavior, defined as the percentage of patients sent for percutaneous biopsy who had a malignancy on their final pathology.

RESULTS

Of 82 patients with tumors of uncertain behavior, 9 had complications, and 23 had malignant final pathology (a "hit rate" of 27.7%). Neurosurgical referral for biopsy of tumors of uncertain behavior was made in 60 patients. Twenty-two had malignant final pathology ("hit rate"= 36.7%). Non-neurosurgical referral for biopsy was made in 22 patients with tumors of uncertain behavior. Two had malignant final pathology ("hit rate"= 4.55%). There was a statistically significant difference between the "hit rate" for the two groups (p = 0.021).

CONCLUSIONS

The decision to biopsy a peripheral nerve tumor is largely based on the presumed behavior and prognosis, determined via clinicoradiologic characteristics. Patient care might be improved by delaying percutaneous biopsy of peripheral nerve lesions until after a neurosurgical evaluation.