Imaging features of rosette-forming glioneuronal tumours (RGNTs): A Series of seven cases.
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE
Rosette-forming glioneuronal tumours (RGNTs) are a recently described, rare, distinct nosological entity of the glioneuronal family. We describe imaging findings (CT and MRI) in seven patients with RGNTs.
MATERIALS AND
METHODS
This retrospective study includes seven RGNT patients (4 male, 3 female; age range: 7-42 years; mean age: 25 years) diagnosed and treated at our institute. MR studies were performed on 3 T and 1.5-T clinical MR systems. All patients were reviewed by two experienced neuroradiologists and imaging findings were tabulated.
RESULTS
Five tumours were located in the posterior fossa, and two were in the pineal region. One of the tumours demonstrated multiple satellite lesions, which involved the midbrain, pons, medulla as well as the cervical cord. Tumours located in the pineal region compressed the 3rd ventricle/aqueduct and extended below the tentorium cerebelli. All the tumours demonstrated enhancement, and susceptibility was evident in six of the seven patients. CSF dissemination was present in two patients.
CONCLUSION
RGNTs are usually solid-cystic tumours and frequently demonstrate peripheral/heterogeneous enhancement upon post-contrast study. Haemorrhage is a common feature which may not be evident on CT. Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) dissemination is a feature and appropriate imaging should be performed whenever an RGNT is suspected.
KEY POINTS: CT and MRI findings of seven RGNT cases were retrospectively reviewed. RGNTs are predominantly posterior fossa tumours. RGNTs are typically T1 hypointense and T2 hyperintense. Haemorrhage and peripheral/heterogeneous enhancement are common features of RGNTs. CSF dissemination is a feature of RGNTs and requires appropriate imaging.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.