Elsevier

Clinical Radiology

Volume 59, Issue 2, February 2004, Pages 124-131
Clinical Radiology

Pictorial Review
Malignant and benign compression fractures: differentiation and diagnostic pitfalls on MRI

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crad.2003.07.005Get rights and content

Abstract

The distinction between malignant and benign compression fractures is a common problem in clinical practice. Various imaging techniques (plain radiography, computed tomography, bone scintigraphy) have been used to differentiate these conditions but they are often inadequate in distinguishing the nature of compression fracture. This review illustrates the magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) features of malignant and benign compression fractures with emphasis on the usefulness, limitations and pitfalls of MRI.

Introduction

Differentiation between malignant (pathological) and benign vertebral compression fractures is often problematic. This is particularly difficult in the elderly patients who are predisposed to benign compression fractures caused by osteoporosis. In this group a benign fracture can result from minor trauma and make the interpretation of the lesion difficult if there is a known primary malignancy elsewhere. Establishing the correct diagnosis is of great importance in determining treatment and prognosis.

In addition to osteoporosis other causes of benign compression fracture include trauma, eosinophilic granuloma, Paget's disease, haemangioma, etc. Malignant compression fracture can be either metastatic or primary (bone tumours, multiple myeloma, malignant lymphoma, leukaemia etc.).

Traditionally radiography, bone scintigraphy and computed tomography (CT) have been used for the diagnostic work-up of patients with compression fracture. However, at times these techniques are inadequate for identifying the cause of the compression fractures. Recently magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has been increasingly used for the evaluation of these fractures. Reliable MRI criteria based on changes in the signal intensity and the morphology of the collapsed vertebra has been established for differentiating benign from malignant compression fractures. The purpose of this review is to describe the salient features of malignant and benign compression fractures on MRI.

Section snippets

Malignant compression fracture

On spin-echo T1-weighted images (T1WI) a malignant compression fracture shows complete replacement of normal bone marrow with diffuse low signal intensity in the whole of vertebral body (Figure 1, Figure 2).1., 2., 3., 4., 5., 6. On spin-echo T2 weighted images (T2WI) iso to high signal intensity is seen in the collapsed vertebra (Fig. 1); the distribution of signal intensity can either be homogeneous4 or heterogeneous.1 Abnormal enhancement is seen in the vertebrae on post-contrast medium

Benign compression fracture

Signal intensity of a benign compression fracture varies according to the age of the fracture. Acute osteoporotic fractures (<2 months old) characteristically show a focal band-like area of low signal intensity adjacent to the fractured endplate on T1WI (Fig. 4).1., 2. At least one area of normal signal intensity is seen within the collapsed vertebra. These areas of normal signal intensity are usually located opposite the fractured endplate and can have variable shapes (Fig. 5).1 On T2WI, a

Imaging sequences on MRI

Although conventional imaging sequences (T1 and T2 fast spin-echo) are often enough to make a distinction between malignant and benign compression fractures, additional sequences, such as STIR and fat-suppressed T2WI, can be used for more clear delineation of abnormalities as they give higher contrast between normal and abnormal marrow. A few studies based on a small number of patients have used newer sequences and approaches like dynamic imaging16 and diffusion-weighted imaging17 for the

Pitfalls of MRI

Compression fracture in patients with multiple myeloma, although most likely malignant in pathogenesis, frequently has the appearance of benign osteoporotic fracture on MRI (Fig. 9).18 Only a small percentage of these fractures show MRI features of malignant fracture. Hence multiple myeloma should be considered in the differential diagnosis of non-traumatic, benign-appearing vertebral compression fracture.

Acute traumatic fracture shows diffuse low signal intensity on T1WI and is often

Conclusion

Homogeneous and diffuse abnormal signal intensity, posterior convexity, and involvement of pedicles are signs that are strongly suggestive of malignant compression fracture. Conversely, a band-like area of low signal intensity adjacent to the depressed endplate or preservation of signal intensity of the vertebra suggests benign nature of the collapse. By applying the constellation of morphological and signal intensity criteria the nature of the majority of compression fractures can be correctly

References (18)

  • C.A. Cuenod et al.

    Acute vertebral collapse due to osteoporosis or malignancy: appearance on unenhanced and gadolinium-enhanced MR images

    Radiology

    (1996)
  • L.A. Moulopoulos et al.

    MR prediction of benign and malignant vertebral compression fractures

    J Magn Reson Imaging

    (1996)
  • W.T.C. Yuh et al.

    Vertebral compression fractures: distinction between benign and malignant causes with MR imaging

    Radiology

    (1989)
  • L.L. Baker et al.

    Benign versus pathological compression fractures of vertebral bodies: assessment with conventional spin-echo, chemical-shift, and STIR MR imaging

    Radiology

    (1990)
  • H.S. An et al.

    Can we distinguish between benign versus malignant compression fractures of the spine by magnetic resonance imaging?

    Spine

    (1995)
  • R.E. Rupp et al.

    Magnetic resonance imaging differentiation of compression spine fractures or vertebral lesions caused by osteoporosis or tumor

    Spine

    (1995)
  • T.T. Shih et al.

    Solitary vertebral collapse: distinction between benign and malignant causes using MR patterns

    J Magn Reson Imaging

    (1999)
  • W.E. Palmer et al.

    Benign versus malignant vertebral collapse: value of a fracture line on MR images

    Radiology

    (1999)
  • A. Baur et al.

    Acute osteoporotic and neoplastic vertebral compression fractures: fluid sign at MR imaging

    Radiology

    (2002)
There are more references available in the full text version of this article.

Cited by (69)

  • Diagnostic Performance of F-18 Fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography or Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography for Differentiation of Benign and Malignant Vertebral Compression Fractures: A Meta-Analysis

    2020, World Neurosurgery
    Citation Excerpt :

    Reliable MRI findings for differentiating malignant from benign VCFxs are based on changes in the signal intensity and morphological characteristics of the collapsed vertebrae.3,4 Although the diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of MRI in patients with malignant VCFxs have been reported, the critical findings for malignant VCFxs remain unknown.4-7 Another reliable diagnostic tool for VCFx is F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET) or FDG PET/CT.

  • Shape, texture and statistical features for classification of benign and malignant vertebral compression fractures in magnetic resonance images

    2016, Computers in Biology and Medicine
    Citation Excerpt :

    Complaints from patients related to both types of VCFs, benign and malignant, may be similar; however, the differentiation between the two types of VCFs is fundamental for correct diagnosis and appropriate treatment. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is effective in early detection of vertebral fractures [4,5]. The distribution of the signal intensity abnormality throughout the vertebral body is an important criterion to discriminate between benign and malignant VCFs in MRI, but the analysis of vertebral body shape can also help in this process [6–9].

  • META: An MRI-based scoring system differentiating metastatic from osteoporotic vertebral fractures

    2015, Spine Journal
    Citation Excerpt :

    Therefore, as for the findings that imply MVF rather than OVF, sensitivity was defined as the percentage of patients with existence of each finding in MVF group, and as for the findings that imply OVF rather than MVF, sensitivity was defined as the percentage of patients without existence of each finding in MVF group. When the vertebral fracture is associated with diffuse signal intensity change throughout the vertebra (Fig. 1, Left), in other words complete replacement of normal bone marrow intensity, MVF is implied [1,3,9–18]. On the other hand, if the signal intensity of part of the vertebra remains unchanged, the shape of intensity change can be a key in diagnosis.

View all citing articles on Scopus
View full text