AJDRAJNR - American Journal of Neuroradiology

This Article
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via CrossRef
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Nackos, J.S.
Right arrow Articles by Harnsberger, H.R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Nackos, J.S.
Right arrow Articles by Harnsberger, H.R.

HEAD & NECK

CT and MR Imaging of Giant Cell Granuloma of the Craniofacial Bones

J.S. Nackosa, R.H. Wiggins, IIIa and H.R. Harnsbergera

a Department of Radiology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah

Please address correspondence to: Richard H. Wiggins, III, MD, Departments of Radiology, Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, and Medical Informatics, University of Utah, 30 N. 1900 East, #1A071, Salt Lake City, Utah, 84132-2140; e-mail: Richard.Wiggins{at}hsc.utah.edu

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Giant cell granuloma (GCG) is a rare lesion. The purpose of this study was to determine the CT characteristics and describe possible MR imaging features of GCG of the craniofacial bones.

METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 7 CT studies and 1 MR imaging study of 7 histologically proved cases of GCG in 2 men, 3 women, and 2 patients of unknown gender, aged 12–51 years, during a period of 10 years, from 1995 to 2005.

RESULTS: The granulomas predominantly involved the maxilla in 3 patients, the mandible in 2 patients, the temporal bone in 1 patient, and the nasal cavity in 1 patient. These lesions on imaging were expansile masses that demonstrated adjacent bone wall thinning, and most were associated with lytic bone destruction. They were predominantly masses with soft-tissue attenuation on CT scans and may have infiltrated the surrounding soft-tissue structures. The patient with an MR imaging had a lesion that was hypointense on both T1- and T2-weighted MR images. The lesions revealed avid homogeneous contrast enhancement.

CONCLUSION: The imaging features of GCG are nonspecific. However, this entity should be included in the differential diagnosis of expansile lesions in the craniofacial bones.