Malignant and Benign Peripheral Nerve Sheath Tumors in a Single Center

Abstract

ObjectivesThis study aimed to investigate the combined use of ultrasonography and clinical features for the differentiation of malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumors (MPNST) from benign peripheral nerve sheath tumors (BPNST) and to compare the efficacy of ultrasonography with that of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).MethodsThis retrospective study included 28 MPNSTs and a control group of 57 BPNSTs. All patients underwent an ultrasound scan using the Logiq E9 (GE Health Care, Milwaukee, WI) or EPIQ7 equipment (Philips Medical System, Bothell, WA). A 3.0‐T MRI machine (Ingenia; Philips Healthcare, Best, the Netherlands) was used for scanning, and conventional MRI was performed on different regions based on the patient's clinical situation. The following variables were evaluated: palpable mass, pain, nerve symptoms, maximum diameter, location, shape, boundary, encapsulation, echogenicity, echo homogeneity, presence of a cystic component, calcification, target sign, posterior echo, and intertumoral vascularity of the tumors. The diagnostic efficacy of ultrasonography and clinical factors was compared with that of MRI. Independent factors for predicting MPNST versus BPNST were also assessed.ResultsThe parameters of location, shape, boundary, encapsulation, and vascularity were significantly different between MPNSTs and BPNSTs. Multiple logistic regression analysis showed that shape, boundary, and vascularity were independent predictors of MPNSTs. The sensitivity, specificity, and Youden index of the three clinical and ultrasound factors (shape, boundary, and vascularity) were 0.89, 0.81, and 0.69, respectively, whereas those of MRI were 0.71, 0.89, and 0.61, respectively. No significant differences in the area under the curve (AUC) of the three combined clinical and ultrasound factors and those of MRI were found (P > .05).ConclusionsMRI was useful in the differential diagnosis between MPNSTs and BPNSTs. However, the combination of clinical and ultrasound diagnoses can achieve the same effect as MRI, including shape, boundary, and vasculature.