Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Follow-up of recurrences of limb soft tissue sarcomas in patients with localized disease: performance of ultrasound

  • Musculoskeletal
  • Published:
European Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objectives

To evaluate diagnostic performance of ultrasound in the detection of local recurrences in patients with localized soft tissue sarcomas of the limb.

Methods

An analysis of patients treated for soft tissue sarcomas between 2005 and April 2014 was performed. Sixty-eight patients (men/women, 36:32; age range, 18–84 years) were evaluated. Sensitivity, specificity with 95 % confidence intervals (CIs), positive predictive value (PPV), pre-test probability (the prevalence), negative predictive value (NPV), likelihood ratio for positive results (LH+), accuracy and post-test probability (post-P) of ultrasound were reported on a per patient basis using surgical findings and clinical follow-up as reference standard. Effects of independent variables (US equipment, age and sex, body mass index, radiologist) were considered. Comparison with MR was also performed.

Results

The overall sensitivity and specificity were 0.88 (0.60–0.94) and 0.94 (0.86–0.98). PPV, pre-test probability, NPV, LH+, accuracy and post-P: 0.83/0.25/0.96/14.9/0.92/0.83. There were two false negative cases both graded as G3 and deeply located and three false positive US cases. Diagnostic accuracy was not dependent by US machine (p = 0.08), age and sex (p = 0.16), body mass index (p = 0.07) and radiologists (p = 0.07).

Conclusions

Diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound was relatively high. Negative US results excluded the presence of a local recurrence with acceptable accuracy.

Key points

• US accuracy is relatively high in sarcoma follow-up.

• Negative US results exclude the presence of local recurrence with acceptable accuracy.

• US may miss a small proportion of lesions.

• False positive US cases are rare.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Casali PG, Blay JY (2010) ESMO/CONTICANET/EUROBONET consensus panel of experts. Soft tissue sarcomas: ESMO clinical practice guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol 21:v198–v203

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Kwok HC, Pinto CH, Doyle AJ (2012) The pitfalls of ultrasonography in the evaluation of soft tissue masses. J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol 56:519–524

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Sen J, Agarwal S, Singh S, Sen R, Goel S (2010) Benign vs malignant soft tissue neoplasms: limitations of magnetic resonance imaging. Indian J Cancer 47:280–286

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Choi H, Varma DG, Fornage BD, Kim EE, Johnston DA (1991) Soft-tissue sarcoma: MR imaging vs sonography for detection of local recurrence after surgery. AJR Am J Roentgenol 157:353–358

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Alexander AA, Nazarian LN, Feld RI (1997) Superficial soft-tissue masses suggestive of recurrent malignancy: sonographic localization and biopsy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 169:1449–1451

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Derchi L, Rizzatto G (2007) Technical requirements. In: Bianchi S, Martinoli C (eds) Ultrasound of the musculoskeletal system. Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  7. Moulton JS, Blebea JS, Dunco DM, Braley SE, Bisset GS 3rd, Emery KH (1995) MR imaging of soft-tissue masses: diagnostic efficacy and value of distinguishing between benign and malignant lesions. AJR Am J Roentgenol 164:1191–1199

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Comandone A, Brach del Prever EM et al (2004, revised 2008) Guidelines for soft tissue sarcoma. Piedmont Oncological Network, Turin. Available via www.reteoncologicapiemontese.it. Accessed 24 Mar 2010

  9. Jain S, Xu R, Prieto VG, Lee P (2010) Molecular classification of soft tissue sarcomas and its clinical applications. Int J Clin Exp Pathol 23:416–428

    Google Scholar 

  10. UICC (2002) TNM classification of malignant tumours, 6th edn. Wiley, Hoboken

    Google Scholar 

  11. STARD (2008) STARD statement. www.stard-statement.org. Accessed 8 Mar 2012

  12. Varma DG, Jackson EF, Pollock RE, Benjamin RS (1995) Soft-tissue sarcoma of the extremities. MR appearance of post-treatment changes and local recurrences. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 3:695–712

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Patel SR, Zagars GK, Pisters PW (2003) The follow-up of adult soft tissue sarcomas. Semin Oncol 30(3):413–416

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Vanel D, Shapeero LG, De Baere T et al (1994) MR imaging in the follow-up of malignant and aggressive soft-tissue tumors: results of 511 examinations. Radiology 190:263–268

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Labarre D, Aziza R, Filleron T, Delannes M, Delaunay F, Marques B et al (2009) Detection of local recurrences of limb soft tissue sarcomas: is magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) relevant? Eur J Radiol 72:50–53

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Hoeber I, Spillane AJ, Fisher C, Thomas JM (2001) Accuracy of biopsy techniques for limb and limb girdle soft tissue tumors. Ann Surg Oncol 1:80–87

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Agresti A, Coull BA (1998) Approximate is better than “exact” for interval estimation of binomial proportions. Am Stat 52:119–126

    Google Scholar 

  18. Del Grande F, Subhawong T, Weber K, Aro M, Mugera C, Fayad LM (2014) Detection of soft-tissue sarcoma recurrence: added value of functional MR imaging techniques at 3.0 T. Radiology 271:499–511

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Pickhardt PJ, Lawrence EM, Pooler BD, Bruce RJ (2011) Diagnostic performance of multidetector computed tomography for suspected acute appendicitis. Ann Intern Med 154:789–796

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Zhao F, Ahlawat S, Farahani SJ et al (2014) Can MR imaging be used to predict tumor grade in soft-tissue sarcoma? Radiology 272:192–201

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The scientific guarantor of this publication is Alberto Tagliafico, MD. The authors of this manuscript declare no relationships with any companies whose products or services may be related to the subject matter of the article. The authors state that this work has not received any funding. Prof. Maria Pia Sormani kindly provided statistical advice for this manuscript. And one of the authors has significant statistical expertise. Institutional review board approval was not deemed necessary owing to the retrospective nature of the study. Written informed consent was obtained from all subjects (patients) in this study. Methodology: observational, monocentric. The project was awarded at ESSR (European Society of Musculoskeletal Radiology) 2014: ESSR Young Researchers Grant to Dr. Bianca Bignotti on occasion of the Annual Scientific Meeting 2014 in Riga, Latvia. The project is partially supported by the AIUM (American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine) Endowment for Education and Research (EER) with a grant to Alberto Tagliafico. The study is partially supported by the University of Genova with a grant (PRA) to Carlo Martinoli.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alberto Tagliafico.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Tagliafico, A., Truini, M., Spina, B. et al. Follow-up of recurrences of limb soft tissue sarcomas in patients with localized disease: performance of ultrasound. Eur Radiol 25, 2764–2770 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-015-3645-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-015-3645-z

Keywords

Navigation