Multimodality imaging of small bowel neoplasms

Discordance Rate and Risk Factor of Other Diagnostic Modalities for Small Bowel Tumors Detected by Device-Assisted Enteroscopy: A Korean Association for the Study of Intestinal Disease (KASID) Multicenter Study

Background/Aims

Despite advances in imaging and endoscopic technology, diagnostic modalities for small bowel tumors are simultaneously performed. We investigated the discrepancy rate between each modality and predictive factors of discrepancy in patients with definite small bowel tumors.

Methods

Data of patients with definite small bowel tumors who underwent both device-assisted enteroscopy (DAE) and computed tomography (CT) were retrieved from web-based enteroscopy registry database in Korea. Predictive risk factors associated with discrepancy were analyzed using logistic regression analysis.

Results

Among 998 patients, 210 (21.0%) were diagnosed with small bowel tumor using DAE, in 193 patients with definite small bowel tumor, DAE and CT were performed. Of these patients, 12 (6.2%) showed discrepancy between examinations. Among 49 patients who underwent DAE and video capsule endoscopy (VCE) examination, 13 (26.5%) showed discrepancy between examinations. No significant independent risk factors were associated with concordance between DAE and CT in multivariate logistic regression analysis among the patients. In a multivariate logistic regression analysis, red blood cell transfusion was negatively associated with concordance between DAE and VCE in patients with small bowel tumor (odds ratio, 0.163; 95% confidence interval, 0.026 to 1.004; p=0.050).

Conclusions

For small bowel tumors, the discrepancy rate between DAE and CT was 6.2%, and 26.5% between DAE and VCE. Despite developments in cross-sectional imaging (VCE and DAE modalities), discrepancies still exist. For small bowel bleeding that require significant transfusion while showing insignificant VCE findings, DAE should be considered as the next diagnostic approach, considering the possibility of missed small bowel tumor.

Current landscape of primary small bowel leiomyosarcoma: cases report and a decade of insights

The incidence of leiomyosarcoma (LMS) is about 4-5/100,000 individuals per year. LMSs occurring in the small bowel are even rarer, and their preoperative diagnosis is very difficult. We described two patients with pathologically confirmed small bowel LMS and analyzed their clinical and medical imaging features. Similar cases reported in English in Pubmed database over the past decade were reviewed and summarized. These tumors were categorized by the growth direction and relationship with the intestinal lumen into three types: intraluminal (n = 10), intermural (n = 3), and extraluminal (n = 7). Notably, among the three types of LMS, the intramural leiomyosarcoma stands out as a noteworthy subtype. Emerging evidence suggests that smaller tumor size (< 5 cm) and the intraluminal type may serve as favorable prognostic indicators, while the extraluminal type is associated with relatively poor prognosis. Furthermore, the integration of imaging features with CA125 and LDH biomarkers holds promise for potential diagnostic value in LMS.

CT Texture Analysis for Preoperative Identification of Lymphoma from Other Types of Primary Small Bowel Malignancies

Objectives

To explore the application of computed tomography (CT) texture analysis in differentiating lymphomas from other malignancies of the small bowel.

Methods

Arterial and venous CT images of 87 patients with small bowel malignancies were retrospectively analyzed. The subjective radiological features were evaluated by the two radiologists with a consensus agreement. The region of interest (ROI) was manually delineated along the edge of the lesion on the largest slice, and a total of 402 quantified features were extracted automatically from AK software. The inter- and intrareader reproducibility was evaluated to select highly reproductive features. The univariate analysis and minimum redundancy maximum relevance (mRMR) algorithm were applied to select the feature subsets with high correlation and low redundancy. The multivariate logistic regression analysis based on texture features and radiological features was employed to construct predictive models for identification of small bowel lymphoma. The diagnostic performance of multivariate models was evaluated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis.

Results

The clinical data (age, melena, and abdominal pain) and radiological features (location, shape, margin, dilated lumen, intussusception, enhancement level, adjacent peritoneum, and locoregional lymph node) differed significantly between the nonlymphoma group and lymphoma group (p < 0.05). The areas under the ROC curve of the clinical model, arterial texture model, and venous texture model were 0.93, 0.92, and 0.87, respectively.

Conclusion

The arterial texture model showed a great diagnostic value and fitted performance in preoperatively discriminating lymphoma from nonlymphoma of the small bowel.

Duodenal tumors on cross-sectional imaging with emphasis on multidetector computed tomography: a pictorial review

Duodenal tumours are uncommon, but they can cause significant morbidity and mortality. As stomach and colon are a more common site of gastrointestinal malignancies, radiologists sometimes neglect the duodenum. Multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) can accurately locate and characterize mass-forming duodenal lesions, making them invaluable for the differential diagnosis and determining management strategies such as biopsy or surgery. Although conventional endoscopy continues to play an important role in the diagnosis of duodenal tumors, MDCT and MRI are very useful for evaluating the duodenal wall, extraduodenal space, and surrounding viscera, as well as the intraluminal content seen on endoscopy. This pictorial review aims to illustrate the most common benign and malignant mass-forming duodenal lesions and to focus on the imaging features that are most helpful in reaching the correct diagnosis.

Small Bowel Neoplasms: A Pictorial Review

Small bowel tumors are rare and account for approximately 3% of all gastrointestinal tumors in the United States. The incidence of small bowel neoplasms is rising-in particular, there is a rising incidence of small bowel carcinoid tumors. This may in part be due to small bowel lesion identification in an increasing number of cross-sectional imaging studies performed for other indications as well as increased use of advanced imaging techniques to assess specifically for small bowel disease. Diagnosis is a challenge owing to nonspecific clinical manifestation, rare occurrence, and low index of clinical suspicion. Yet, various small bowel neoplasms have characteristic imaging features at CT and MRI when optimal distention of the small bowel is achieved, correlating well with features seen in gross specimens. Understanding the imaging features of small bowel neoplasms is important to improve the radiologist's ability to diagnose and characterize small bowel neoplasms. Most small bowel tumors are clinically silent for long periods, and nearly half of the benign tumors are found incidentally during surgery or at cross-sectional imaging performed for other reasons. The authors review the imaging features of common benign and malignant small bowel neoplasms to aid the radiologist in diagnosis of small bowel tumors. ^©RSNA, 2020.

Magnetic Resonance of Small Bowel Tumors

Tumors of the small intestine represent less than 5% of all gastrointestinal tract neoplasms. Magnetic resonance (MR) imaging is rapidly increasing clinical acceptance to evaluate the small bowel and can be the initial imaging method to investigate small bowel diseases. MR examinations may provide the first opportunity to detect and characterize tumors of the small bowel. Intraluminal and extraluminal MR findings, combined with contrast enhancement and functional information, allow accurate diagnoses and consequently characterization of small bowel neoplasms. This article describes the MR findings of primary small bowel neoplasms and the MR findings for the differential diagnosis are discussed.