JOURNAL DESCRIPTION
The Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety journal ISSN 1024-6177 was founded in January 1956 (before December 30, 1993 it was entitled Medical Radiology, ISSN 0025-8334). In 2018, the journal received Online ISSN: 2618-9615 and was registered as an electronic online publication in Roskomnadzor on March 29, 2018. It publishes original research articles which cover questions of radiobiology, radiation medicine, radiation safety, radiation therapy, nuclear medicine and scientific reviews. In general the journal has more than 30 headings and it is of interest for specialists working in thefields of medicine¸ radiation biology, epidemiology, medical physics and technology. Since July 01, 2008 the journal has been published by State Research Center - Burnasyan Federal Medical Biophysical Center of Federal Medical Biological Agency. The founder from 1956 to the present time is the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation, and from 2008 to the present time is the Federal Medical Biological Agency.
Members of the editorial board are scientists specializing in the field of radiation biology and medicine, radiation protection, radiation epidemiology, radiation oncology, radiation diagnostics and therapy, nuclear medicine and medical physics. The editorial board consists of academicians (members of the Russian Academy of Science (RAS)), the full member of Academy of Medical Sciences of the Republic of Armenia, corresponding members of the RAS, Doctors of Medicine, professor, candidates and doctors of biological, physical mathematics and engineering sciences. The editorial board is constantly replenished by experts who work in the CIS and foreign countries.
Six issues of the journal are published per year, the volume is 13.5 conventional printed sheets, 88 printer’s sheets, 1.000 copies. The journal has an identical full-text electronic version, which, simultaneously with the printed version and color drawings, is posted on the sites of the Scientific Electronic Library (SEL) and the journal's website. The journal is distributed through the Rospechat Agency under the contract № 7407 of June 16, 2006, through individual buyers and commercial structures. The publication of articles is free.
The journal is included in the List of Russian Reviewed Scientific Journals of the Higher Attestation Commission. Since 2008 the journal has been available on the Internet and indexed in the RISC database which is placed on Web of Science. Since February 2nd, 2018, the journal "Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety" has been indexed in the SCOPUS abstract and citation database.
Brief electronic versions of the Journal have been publicly available since 2005 on the website of the Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety Journal: http://www.medradiol.ru. Since 2011, all issues of the journal as a whole are publicly available, and since 2016 - full-text versions of scientific articles. Since 2005, subscribers can purchase full versions of other articles of any issue only through the National Electronic Library. The editor of the Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety Journal in accordance with the National Electronic Library agreement has been providing the Library with all its production since 2005 until now.
The main working language of the journal is Russian, an additional language is English, which is used to write titles of articles, information about authors, annotations, key words, a list of literature.
Since 2017 the journal Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety has switched to digital identification of publications, assigning to each article the identifier of the digital object (DOI), which greatly accelerated the search for the location of the article on the Internet. In future it is planned to publish the English-language version of the journal Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety for its development. In order to obtain information about the publication activity of the journal in March 2015, a counter of readers' references to the materials posted on the site from 2005 to the present which is placed on the journal's website. During 2015 - 2016 years on average there were no more than 100-170 handlings per day. Publication of a number of articles, as well as electronic versions of profile monographs and collections in the public domain, dramatically increased the number of handlings to the journal's website to 500 - 800 per day, and the total number of visits to the site at the end of 2017 was more than 230.000.
The two-year impact factor of RISC, according to data for 2017, was 0.439, taking into account citation from all sources - 0.570, and the five-year impact factor of RISC - 0.352.
Issues journals
Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety. 2023. Vol. 68. № 3
DOI: 10.33266/1024-6177-2023-68-3-39-45
E. Rasskazova1, A. Zikiryakhodzhaev1, 2, 3, E. Khmelevsky1
Radiation Therapy for Breast Cancer pT1–3N0–1M0 after Mastectomy or Subcutaneous/Skin-Preserving Mastectomy with Reconstruction. Literature Review
1P.A. Hertsen Moscow Oncology Research Institute – Branch of the National Medical Research Radiological Centre, Moscow, Russia
2I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University (Sechenov University), Moscow, Russia
3Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia, (RUDN University), Moscow, Russia
Contact person: E. Rasskazova, e-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
ABSTRACT
Purpose: The literature review analyzes publications over the past decades on the need for radiation therapy after mastectomy or subcutaneous/skin-preserving mastectomy with reconstruction.
Results: Risk factors for breast cancer recurrence were analyzed. The effect of radiation therapy on the recurrence of breast cancer after mastectomy, subcutaneous and skin-preserving mastectomy with reconstruction was evaluated depending on the stage, lymph node lesions, and the presence of unfavorable molecular biological types. Indications for radiation therapy are described. The effect of radiation therapy on early and late complications of the reconstructed breast and options for reducing the percentage of complications were analyzed.
Conclusion: The exclusion of radiation therapy from the breast cancer treatment plan is a decrease in the percentage of complications caused by radiation therapy, for example, during implant reconstruction – a decrease in capsular contractures. And, as a result, improving the quality of life of patients, reducing repeated operations in case of complications, which means it is economically profitable. In recent years, due to the increasing need for various breast reconstruction options, the surgeon and radiotherapist have faced the task of choosing the optimal sequence of breast reconstruction, as well as reducing the risk of post-radiation complications. Radiation therapy, along with reducing the risk of relapse of the disease, increases the risk of complications after breast reconstruction, and vice versa, the reconstructed mammary gland can cause difficulties for the radiologist to correctly deliver the required dose of radiation. Minimizing the frequency and severity of complications after radiation therapy on the reconstructed gland without compromising oncological or cosmetic results is an important and common interdisciplinary goal for oncologists and radiotherapists.
Keywords: breast cancer, mastectomy, subcutaneous mastectomy, skin-preserving mastectomy, breast reconstruction, simultaneous reconstruction, radiation therapy, relapse, rehabilitation, capsular contracture, quality of life
For citation: Rasskazova E, Zikiryakhodzhaev A, Khmelevsky E.Radiation Therapy for Breast Cancer pT1–3N0–1M0 after Mastectomy or Subcutaneous/Skin-Preserving Mastectomy with Reconstruction. Literature Review. Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety. 2023;68(3):39-45. (In Russian). DOI: 10.33266/1024-6177-2023-68-3-39-45
References
1. Montero A., Ciérvide R., García-Aranda M., Rubio C. Postmastectomy Radiation Therapy in Early Breast Cancer: Utility or Futility? Critical Reviews in Oncology/Hematology. 2020;147:10288. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.critrevonc.2020.102887.
2. Agha R.A., Omran Y.Al., Wellstead G., Sagoo H. Systematic Review of Therapeutic Nipple-Sparing Versus Skin-Sparing Mastectomy. BJS Open. 2018;3;2:135-145. doi: 10.1002/bjs5.50119.
3. McGale P., Taylor C., Correa C. et al. Effect of Radiotherapy after Mastectomy and Axillary Surgery on 10-Year Recurrence and 20-Year Breast Cancer Mortality: Meta-Analysis of Individual Patient Data For 8135 Women in 22 Randomised Trials. Lancet. 2014;383;9935:2127-2135. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(14)60488-8.
4. Wang K., Jin X., Wang W.J., et al. The Role of Postmastectomy Radiation in Patients with Ypn0 Breast Cancer after Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: A Meta-Analysis. BMC Cancer. 202;21;1:728. doi: 10.1186/s12885-021-08423-1.
5. Nikyara N., Tegneliusb E., Valachis A. Adjuvant Locoregional Radiation Therapy in Breast Cancer Patients with Pathologic Complete Response after Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Clinical and Translational Radiation Oncology. 2022;33:45-52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ctro.2021.12.010.
6. Weber W.P., Shaw J., Pusic A., et al. Oncoplastic Breast Consortium Recommendations for Mastectomy and Whole Breast Reconstruction in the Setting of Post-Mastectomy Radiation Therapy. Breast. 2022;63:123-139. doi: 10.1016/j.breast.2022.03.008.
7. Hehr Th., Baumann R., Budach W. Radiotherapy after Skin-Sparing Mastectomy with Immediate Breast Reconstruction in Intermediate-Risk Breast Cancer: Indication and Technical Considerations. Strahlenther Onkol. 2019;195;11:949-963. doi: 10.1007/s00066-019-01507-9.
8. Cihan Y.B., Sarigoz T. Role of Postmastectomy Radiation Therapy in Breast Cancer Patients with T1-2 And 1-3 Positive Lymph Nodes. Onco. Targets. Ther. 2016;9:5587-5595. doi: 10.2147/OTT.S106871.
9. Chen F., Pu F. Role of Postmastectomy Radiotherapy in Early-Stage (T1-2N0-1M0) Triple-Negative Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review. Onco. Targets. Ther. 2017;10:2009-2016. doi: 10.2147/OTT.S123803.
10. Jaoude J.A., Azambuja E., Makki M., et al. Post-Mastectomy Radiation Therapy in Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2 Positive Breast Cancer Patients: Analysis of the HERA Trial. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 2020;106;3)503-510. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2019.10.022.
11. Деньгина Н.В. Особые показания к адъювантной лучевой терапии при раке молочной железы T2N1M0 после радикальной мастэктомии // Эффективная фармакотерапия. 2017. № 6. С. 12-15. [Dengina N.V. Special Indications for Adjuvant Radiation Therapy for Breast Cancer T2N1M0 after Radical Mastectomy. Effektivnaya Farmakoterapiya = Effective Pharmacotherapy. 2017;6:12-15 (In Russ.)].
12. Forissier V., Tallet A., Cohen M. ,et al. Is Post-Mastectomy Radiation Therapy Contributive in pN0-1mi Breast Cancer Patients? Results of a French Multi-Centric Cohort. Eur. J. Cancer. 2017;87:47-57. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2017.10.004
13. Xu F-F., Cao L., Xu Ch., et al. Practical Model to Optimize the Strategy of Adjuvant Postmastectomy Radiotherapy in T1-2N1 Breast Cancer With Modern Systemic Therapy. Front Oncol. 2022;12:789198. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2022.789198.
14. Frandsen J.E., Cannon G., Kokeny K.E., et al. Is Radiation Indicated for Young Women with Early Stage, Node-Negative Breast Cancer after Mastectomy? A Multi-Institution, Retrospective Review. Breast J. 2018;24;1:7-11. doi: 10.1111/tbj.12827.
15. Miyashita M., Tada H., Suzuki A. Minimal Impact of Postmastectomy Radiation Therapy on Locoregional Recurrence for Breast Cancer Patients with 1 to 3 Positive Lymph Nodes in the Modern Treatment Era. Surg. Oncol. 2017;26;2:163-170. doi: 10.1016/j.suronc.2017.03.003.
16. Галченко Л.И., Маточкин В.В. Лучевые осложнения при лучевой терапии: Учебное пособие для студентов. Иркутск: ИГМУ, 2015. 30 с. [Galchenko L.I., Matochkin V.V. Luchevyye Oslozhneniya pri Luchevoy Terapii = Radiation Complications in Radiation Therapy. A Textbook for Students. Irkutsk Publ., 2015. 30 p. (In Russ.)].
17. Montero A., Ciérvide R., García-Aranda M., Rubio C. Postmastectomy Radiation Therapy in Early Breast Cancer: Utility or Futility? Critical Reviews in Oncology/Hematology. 2020;147:10288. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.critrevonc.2020.102887.
18. Гулян И.С., Никифорова Н.О., Кустов В.Н. и др. Генерация вторичного излучения на поверхности эндопротезов, используемых для реконструкции молочной железы при мастэктомии, после проведения лучевой терапии // Тихоокеанский медицинский журнал. 2020. № 4. С. 59–62. doi: 10.34215/1609-1175-2020-4-59-62. [Gulyan I.S., Nikiforova N.O., Kustov V.N., et al. Generation of Secondary Radiation on the Surface of Endoprostheses Used for Breast Reconstruction During Mastectomy, after Radiation Therapy. Tikhookeanskiy Meditsinskiy Zhurnal = Pacific Medical Journal. 2020;4:59–62. doi: 10.34215/1609-1175-2020-4-59-62 (In Russ.)].
19. Mitchell M.P., Wagner J., Butterworth J. Subcutaneous Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction, a Modern Challenge in Postmastectomy Radiation Planning. Pract. Radiat. Oncol. 2018;8;3:153-156. doi: 10.1016/j.prro.2017.09.001.
20. Elswick S.M., Harless Ch.A., Bishop S.N., et al. Prepectoral Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction with Postmastectomy Radiation Therapy. Plast. Reconstr. Surg. 2018;142;1:1-12. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000004453.
21. Chopra Sh., Al-Ishaq Z., Vidya R. The Journey of Prepectoral Breast Reconstruction Through Time. World J. Plast. Surg. 2021;10;2:3-13. doi: 10.29252/wjps.10.2.3.
22. NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines®) Breast Cancer. Version 4.2022. 2022.
23. Hershenhouse K.S., Bick K., Shauly O., et al. Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Immediate Versus Delayed Autologous Breast Reconstruction in the Setting of Post-Mastectomy Adjuvant Radiation Therapy. J. Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2021;74;5:931-944. doi: 10.1016/j.bjps.2020.11.027.
24. Zernov K.Y., Dashyan G.A., Krivorotko P.V., et al. Breast Reconstruction and Radiotherapy. Malignant Tumours. 2017;1:30–36. DOI: 10.18027/2224–5057–2017–1–30–36.
PDF (RUS) Full-text article (in Russian)
Conflict of interest. The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Financing. The study had no sponsorship.
Contribution. Article was prepared with equal participation of the authors.
Article received: 20.01.2022. Accepted for publication: 25.02.2023.
Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety. 2023. Vol. 68. № 3
DOI: 10.33266/1024-6177-2023-68-3-52-56
A.Sh. Pattokhov1, Yu.M. Khodjibekova1, M.Kh. Khodjibekov2
Choise of Statistical Processing Methods for the Results
of Radcomic Analysis of CT Images of Head and Neck Tumors
1 Tashkent state dental institute, This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. , Tashkent, Uzbekistan
2 Tashkent medical academy, This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. , Tashkent, Uzbekistan
Contact person: Marat Khudaykulovich Khodjibekov, e-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
ABSTRACT
Purpose: Selection of the optimal method for statistical processing of the results of texture analysis of conventional CT images in patients with head and neck tumors.
Material and methods: A total of 118 patients aged from 4 to 80 years with a verified diagnosis of 37 benign and 81 malignant head and neck tumors were studied. Texture analysis was performed using LIFEx program, version 7.10, with statistical processing using SPSS, MedCalc, XLSTAT, R.
Results: The 39 texture indicators extracted from CT images were subjected to statistical processing by different methods, including Mann-Whitney U test, correlation matrix, factor analysis, LASSO-regression, ending with the development of a logistic classification model. Of the multiple processing methods, LASSO-regression followed by logistic model was optimal; according to its results, the percentage of correct classification of benign and malignant patient groups was – 81.3 %, area under the ROC curve was 0.902±0.029 (p<0.0001), sensitivity – 82.7 %, specificity – 87.5 %.
Conclusion: Texture analysis of medical images allows non-invasive prediction of benign or malignant nature of the imaged head and neck mass. The choice of the correct method for statistical processing of texture analysis results is critical to assess and classify patients according to the nature of the tumor.
Keywords: CT images, head and neck tumors, radiomics, texture analysis, statistical processing
For citation: Pattokhov ASh, Khodjibekova YuM, Khodjibekov MKh. Choise of Statistical Processing Methods for the Results of Radcomic Analysis of CT Images of Head and Neck Tumors. Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety. 2023;68(3):52–56. (In Russian). DOI: 10.33266/1024-6177-2023-68-3-52-56
References
1. Petralia G., Bonello L., Viotti S., Preda L., d’Andrea G., Bellomi M. CT Perfusion in Oncology: How to Do It. Cancer Imaging. 2010;10;1:8-19. doi: 10.1102/1470-7330.2010.0001.
2. Gerashchenko T.S., Denisov E.V., Litvyakov N.V., Zavyalova M.V., Vtorushin S.V., Tsyganov M.M., Perelmuter V.M., Cherdyntseva N.V. Intratumor Heterogeneity: Nature and Biological Significance. Biokhimiya = Biochemistry. 2013;78;11:1531–1549 (In Russ.).
3. Lin G., Keshari K.R., Park J.M. Cancer Metabolism and Tumor Heterogeneity: Imaging Perspectives Using MR Imaging and Spectroscopy. Contrast Media Mol Imaging. 2017;2017:6053879. doi: 10.1155/2017/6053879.
4. Nioche C., Orlhac F., Boughdad S., Reuzé S., Goya-Outi J., Robert C., Pellot-Barakat C., Soussan M., Frouin F., Buvat I. LIFEx: a Freeware for Radiomic Feature Calculation in Multimodality Imaging to Accelerate Advances in the Characterization of Tumor Heterogeneity. Cancer Research. 2018;78;16:4786-4789. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-18-0125.
5. Nailon W.H. Texture Analysis Methods for Medical Image Characterisation. Biomedical Imaging. Ed. Mao Y. London, IntechOpen, 2010. URL: https://www.intechopen.com/chapters/10175. doi: 10.5772/8912.
6. Wu J., Aguilera T., Shultz D., Gudur M., Rubin D.L., Loo B.W.Jr., Diehn M., Li R. Early-Stage Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: Quantitative Imaging Characteristics of (18)F Fluorodeoxyglucose PET/CT Allow Prediction of Distant Metastasis. Radiology. 2016;281;1:270-278. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2016151829.
7. Romeo V., Cuocolo R., Ricciardi C., Ugga L., Cocozza S., Verde F., et al. Prediction of Tumor Grade and Nodal Status in Oropharyngeal and Oral Cavity Squamous-Cell Carcinoma Using a Radiomic Approach. Anticancer Res. 2020;40:271–280. DOI: 10.21873/anticanres.13949.
8. Bogowicz M., Riesterer O., Ikenberg K., Stieb S., Moch H., Studer G., Guckenberger M, Tanadini-Lang S. Computed Tomography Radiomics Predicts HPV Status and Local Tumor Control After Definitive Radiochemotherapy in Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 2017;99;4:921-928. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2017.06.002.
9. Ren J., Qi M., Yuan Y., Duan S., Tao X. Machine Learning-Based MRI Texture Analysis to Predict the Histologic Grade of Oral Squamous Cell Carcinoma. Am. J. Roentgenol. 2020;15;5:1184-1190. doi: 10.2214/AJR.19.22593.
10. Zhang Y., Chen C., Tian Z., Feng R., Cheng Y., Xu J. The Diagnostic Value of MRI-Based Texture Analysis in Discrimination of Tumors Located in Posterior Fossa: a Preliminary Study. Front. Neurosci. 2019;13:1113. doi: 10.3389/fnins.2019.0111.
PDF (RUS) Full-text article (in Russian)
Conflict of interest. The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Financing. The study had no sponsorship.
Contribution. Article was prepared with equal participation of the authors.
Article received: 20.01.2022. Accepted for publication: 25.02.2023.
Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety. 2023. Vol. 68. № 3
DOI: 10.33266/1024-6177-2023-68-3-57-65
A.S. Krylov1, B.Ya. Narkevich1, 2, A.D. Ryzhkov1, 3, V.V. Krylov4, T.M. Geliashvili1, A.I. Pronin1
The Efficacy of Radionuclide Therapy for Bone Metastasis
1 N.N. Blokhin National Medical Research Center of Oncology, Moscow, Russia
2Association of Medical Physicists of Russia, Moscow, Russia
3Russian Medical Academy of Continuous Professional Education, Moscow, Russia
4A.F. Tsyb Medical Radiology Research Center, Obninsk, Russia
Contact persons: Boris Yaroslavovich Narkevich, e-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
ABSTRACT
Purpose: Development of a methodology for evaluating the effectiveness of radionuclide therapy for bone metastases based on dosimetric and clinical and laboratory criteria.
Material and methods: A comparative analysis of the functionality of various criteria for assessing the long-term and short-term effectiveness of radionuclide therapy of bone metastases was carried out. Focal absorbed doses of internal exposure are considered as one of the criteria, for the determination of which a simplified method for their calculation is proposed based on quantitative data from SPECT/CT scanning of an X-ray phantom and a real patient who has been injected with a β-γ-emitting therapeutic radiopharmaceutical.
Results: On a clinical example of radionuclide therapy with 177Lu-PSMA-617 in a patient with stage 4 prostate cancer, dose estimates of internal irradiation of foci with β-particles were obtained. Calculations were made for bone metastases of 7 localizations in dynamics for each of the 5 fractions of the course of radionuclide therapy. It is shown that the total focal doses for 5 fractions of internal exposure vary from 70.6 to 116.8 Gy for different foci, which corresponds to the literature data obtained by more accurate methods of dosimetry of internal exposure. The obtained dosimetric data were compared with efficacy estimates based on metabolic, hematological, hormonal and biochemical parameters, as well as on the tumor marker PSA.
Conclusion: The main criterion for assessing the antitumor efficacy of radionuclide therapy is the metabolic activity of bone foci, while data on the accumulated focal doses of internal β-irradiation are of an auxiliary nature. Hematological indicators should be the criteria for assessing radiotoxicity and used to adjust the course of radionuclide therapy.
Keywords: radionuclide therapy, β-γ-emitting radiopharmaceuticals, bone metastases, internal irradiation, therapy effectiveness, evaluation criteria, dosimetric parameters, clinical and laboratory parameters
For citation: Krylov AS, Narkevich BYa, Ryzhkov AD, Krylov VV, Geliashvili TM, Pronin AI. The Efficacy of Radionuclide Therapy for Bone Metastasis. Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety. 2023;68(3):57–65. (In Russian). DOI: 10.33266/1024-6177-2023-68-3-57-65
References
- ICRU Report 96. Dosimetry-Guided Radiopharmaceutical Therapy. Journal of ICRU. 2021; 21(1).
- Росcийские клинические рекомендации по диагностике и лечению лимфопролиферативных заболеваний. Под рук. И.В. Поддубной, В.Г. Савченко М.: ММА МедиаМедика, 2014. [Russian clinical guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of lymphoproliferative diseases. Poddubnaya IV, Savchenko VG. M.: MMA MediaMedica, 2014. (In Russian)].
- Гележе П. В., Морозов С. П., Мандельблат Ю. Э., Либсон Е. И. Что нового в критериях оценки онкологических заболеваний в лучевой диагностике: RECIST vs. PERCIST. Лучевая диагностика и терапия. 2014. № 2(5). С. 28–36. [Gelezhe PV, Morozov SP, Mandelblat YuE, Libson EI. Whatʼs News in Cancer Evaluation Criteria in Medical Imaging: RECIST vs. PERCIST. Radiation Diagnostics and Therapy. 2014; (2(5)):28-36. (In Russian)].
- Bentzen SM, Constine LS, Deasy JO, et al. Quantitative analyses of normal tissue effects in the clinic (QUANTEC): an introduction to the scientific issues. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2010; 76(3): 3–9.
- Sgouros G, Bodei L, McDevitt MR, Nedrow JR. Radiopharmaceutical therapy in cancer: clinical advances and challenges. Nature Reviews: Drug Discovery. 2020; 19: 589-608.
- Наркевич Б.Я., Крылов А.С., Рыжков А.Д. Упрощенный способ расчета доз внутреннего облучения костных метастазов при радионуклидной терапии. Медицинская физика. 2023. № 1(97). С. 43-56. [Narkevich BYa, Krylov AS, Ryzhkov AD. A simplified method for calculating internal doses of bone metastases during radionuclide therapy. Medical Physics. 2023;(1(97)):43-56. (In Russian)].
PDF (RUS) Full-text article (in Russian)
Conflict of interest. The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Financing. The study had no sponsorship.
Contribution. Article was prepared with equal participation of the authors.
Article received: 20.01.2022. Accepted for publication: 25.02.2023.
Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety. 2023. Vol. 68. № 3
DOI: 10.33266/1024-6177-2023-68-3-46-51
M.V. Lukin1, E.A. Brui2, A.G. Levchuk1, A.A. Borshevetskaya1, V.A. Fokin1,
V.M. Puchnin2, A.V. Shchelokova2, N.A. Anokhina1, L.E. Galyautdinova1,
V.S. Egorova1, K.S. Anpilogova1
An Innovative Approach to Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Wrist
1 V.A. Almazov National Medical Research Centre, St. Petersburg, Russia
2 National Research University IFMO, Faculty of Physics and Technology, St. Petersburg, Russia
Contact person: K.S. Anpilogova, e-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
ABSTRACT
Purpose: Determination of the diagnostic capabilities of a specialized metadevice designed to detect magnetic resonance signs of pathological changes in the hands (including early ones) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.
Material and methods: The study considered a metadevice for imaging of hands with magnetic induction 1.5 T. 26 people were examined, 10 of whom were studied using a standard coil for examining the knee joint and 16 using a metadevice, magnetic resonance images T1-VI, T2-VI, PD FS-VI were obtained. The images were evaluated by radiologists on a 5-point scale Likert.
Results: The images acquired using the metadevice had acceptable and peer-reviewed absolute and relative signal-to-noise ratios with images obtained using a standard pattern at the same resolution deviation and measuring input power at an average of 18 times for 1.5 T. In terms of image quality criteria for the presence/absence of arthritis, the average score for the metadevice (4.33) is slightly higher than the score for the specialized coil (4.25). The lower score of the standard coil, including on the issue of artifacts, indicates a lower susceptibility of the metadevice to various factors that give artifacts on MRI.
Discussion: The analysis of the collected assessments of independent experts indicates that the diagnostic characteristics of magnetic resonance images of the hand obtained using wire-based metadevices (for 1.5 T) are of good and average levels, and are comparable, and also surpass the standard approaches in all criteria.
Conclusions/Conclusion: The assessment of the quality of the obtained images demonstrates the acceptable quality of imaging and reflects the possibility of their application in clinical practice, taking into account ongoing improvements and optimization of the entire set of pulse sequences for MRI of the hand.
Keywords: magnetic resonance imaging, rheumatoid arthritis,specialized metadevice, hands
For citation: Lukin MV, Brui EA, Levchuk AG, Borshevetskaya AA, Fokin VA, Puchnin VM, Shchelokova AV, Anokhina NA, Galyautdinova LE, Egorova VS, Anpilogova KS. An Innovative Approach to Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Wrist. Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety. 2023;68(3):46–51. (In Russian). DOI: 10.33266/1024-6177-2023-68-3-46-51
References
1. Revmatoidnyy Artrit = Rheumatoid Arthritis. Clinical Recommendations. Moscow Publ., 2021. (In Russ.).
2. Makarova D.V., Kushnir K.V. Standardized Protocol for Describing the Results of Cone-Beam Computed Tomography of the Hand in Rheumatoid Arthritis. Klinicheskaya Meditsina = Clinical Medicine. 2015;7;4:135-140. doi: 10.17691/stm2015.7.4.18 (In Russ.).
3. Østergaard M., Boesen M. Imaging in Rheumatoid Arthritis: the Role of Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Computed Tomography. La Radiologia Medica. 2019;124:1128–1141. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11547-019-01014-y.
4. Webb A.G. Dielectric Materials in Magnetic Resonance. Concepts in Magnetic Resonance. Part A. 2011;38A;4:148–184.
5. Shchelokova A., Ivanov V., Mikhailovskaya A., et al. Ceramic Resonators for Targeted Clinical Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Breast. Nature Communications. 2020;11;1:1-7. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-17598-3.
6. Rupprecht S., Sica C.T., Chen W., et al. Improvements of Transmit Efficiency and Receive Sensitivity with Ultrahigh Dielectric Constant (uHDC) Ceramics at 1.5 T and 3 T. Magnetic Resonance in Medicine. 2018;79;5:2842–2851. https://doi.org/10.1002/mrm.26943.
7. Radu X., Dardenne X., Craeye C. Experimental Results and Discussion of Imaging with a Wire Medium for MRI Imaging Applications. IEEE Antennas and Propagation Society International Symposium. 2007. P. 5499-5502.
8. Motovilova E., Sandeep S., Hashimoto M., et al. Watertunable Highly Sub-Wavelength Spiral Resonator for Magnetic Field Enhancement of MRI Coils at 1.5 T. IEEE Access. 2019;7:90304–90315.
9. Schmidt R., Slobozhanyuk A., Belov P., et al. Flexible and Compact Hybrid Metasurfaces for Enhanced Ultra High Field in Vivo Magnetic Resonance Imaging. Scientific Reports. 2017;7;1:1-7. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-01932-9.
10. Zivkovic I., Teeuwisse W., Slobozhanyuk A., et al. High Permittivity Ceramics Improve the Transmit Feld and Receive Efficiency of a Commercial Extremity Coil at 1.5 Tesla. Journal of Magnetic Resonance. 2019;299:59-65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmr.2018.12.013.
11. Shchelokova A.V., Slobozhanyukab A.P., Bruinc P., et al. Experimental Investigation of a Metasurface Resonator for in Vivo Imaging at 1.5 T. Journal of Magnetic Resonance. 2018;286:78-81.
12. Brui E.A., Shchelokova A.V., Zubkov M., et al. Adjustable Subwavelength Metasurface‐Inspired Resonator for Magnetic Resonance Imaging. Physica Status Solidi (a). 2018;215;5:1700788.
13. Shchelokova A.V., van den Berg C.A., Dobrykh D.A., et al. Volumetric Wireless Coil Based on Periodically Coupled Split-Loop Resonators for Clinical Wrist Imaging. Magnetic Resonance in Medicine. 2018;80;4:1726–1737.
14. Nasonov A., Tikhonov P., Shchelokova A. et al. Assessing Safety and Transceive Performance of a Body Coil Combined with a Volumetric Wireless Coil for Wrist MRI at 3 T. Applied Magnetic Resonance. 2022;53;12:1597-1607. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00723-022-01502-x.
15. Brui E., Mikhailovskaya A., Solomakha G., et al. Volumetric Wireless Coil for Wrist MRI at 1.5 T as a Practical Alternative to Tx/Rx Extremity Coil: a Comparative Study. Journal of Magnetic Resonance. 2022;339:107209.
16. Brui E.A., Rapacchi S., Bendahan D., et al. Comparative Analysis of SINC-Shaped and SLR Pulses Performance for Contiguous Multi-Slice Fast Spin-Echo Imaging Using Metamaterial-Based MRI. Magnetic Resonance Materials in Physics, Biology and Medicine. 2021;34;6:929–938. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10334-021-00937-w.
PDF (RUS) Full-text article (in Russian)
Conflict of interest. The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Financing. The work was supported by the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation (project No. 075-15-2021-592).
Contribution. Article was prepared with equal participation of the authors.
Article received: 20.01.2022. Accepted for publication: 25.02.2023.
Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety. 2023. Vol. 68. № 3
DOI: 10.33266/1024-6177-2023-68-3-66-70
S.N. Prokhorov1, A.S. Krylov1, A.V. Kuzin2, A.D. Ryzhkov1, 2,
N.V. Kochergina1, 2, A.I. Pronin1, A.B. Bludov1, S.G. Anikin3
SAPHO Syndrome: Difficulties of Diagnosis in the Clinical Case. Radiology Imaging
1N.N. Blokhin National Medical Research Center of Oncology, Moscow, Russia
2Russian Medical Academy of Continuous Professional Education, Moscow, Russia
3V.A. Nasonova Research Institute of Rheumatology, Moscow, Russia
Contact person: Sergei Nickolaevich Prokhorov, e-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Abstract
Purpose: Demonstrate the possible manifestations of SAPHO syndrome.
Material and methods: 38-year-old woman with suspected SAPHO syndrome were performed scintigraphy and SPECT/CT for evaluate the localization and abundance of the process.
Results: Osteosclerosis and hyperostosis of the left clavicle, osteosclerosis of the L1 vertebra and other, less pronounced changes, accompanied by active accumulation of the 99mTc-MDP, were revealed.
Conclusion: It is important to remember the specific complex of symptoms of this nosological entity and the possible isolated onset of individual manifestations, which was also observed in our case.
Keywords: SAPHO syndrome, SPECT/CT, bone scan
For citation: Prokhorov SN, Krylov AS, Kuzin AV, Ryzhkov AD, Kochergina NV, Pronin AI, Bludov AB, Anikin SG. SAPHO Syndrome: Difficulties of Diagnosis in the Clinical Case. Radiology Imaging. Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety. 2023;68(3):66–70. (In Russian). DOI: 10.33266/1024-6177-2023-68-3-66-70
References
1. Windom R.E., Sandford J..P, Ziff M. Acne Conglobata and Arthritis. Arthritis Rheum. 1961;4:632–635.
2. Chamot A.M., Benhamou C.L., Kahn M.F., Beraneck L., Kaplan G., Prost A. Le Syndrome Acné Pustulose Hyperostose Ostéite (SAPHO). Résultats d›une enquête nationale. 85 observations. Rev. Rhum. Mal. Osteoartic. 1987;54;3:187-196 (In France).
3. Utumi E.R., Oliveira Sales M.A., Shinohara E.H., Takahashi A., Coracin F.L., Rocha R.G., Paraíso Cavalcanti M.G. SAPHO Syndrome with Temporomandibular Joint Ankylosis: Clinical, Radiological, Histopathological, and Therapeutical Correlations. Oral. Surg. Oral. Med. Oral. Pathol. Oral. Radiol. Endod. 2008;105;3:67–72.
4. Jansson A.F., Grote V., ESPED Study Group. Nonbacterial Osteitis in Children: Data of a German Incidence Surveillance Study. Acta Paediatr. 2011;100;8:1150–1157.
5. Takigawa T., Tanaka M., Nakanishi K., Misawa H., Sugimoto Y., Takahata T., Nakahara H., Nakahara S., Ozaki T. SAPHO Syndrome Associated Spondylitis. Eur Spine J. 2008;17:1391–1397.
6. Marsot-Dupuch K., Doyen J.E., Grauer W.O., de Givry S.C. SAPHO Syndrome of the Temporomandibular Joint Associated with Sudden Deafness. AJNR Am. J. Neuroradiol. 1999;20;5:902–905.
7. Khanna L., El-Khoury G.Y. SAPHO Syndrome – a Pictorial Assay. The Iowa Orthopaedic Journal. 2012;32:189-195.
8. Takigawa T., Tanaka M., Nakahara S., Sugimoto Y., Ozaki T. SAPHO Syndrome with Rapidly Progressing Destructive Spondylitis: Two Cases Treated Surgically. Eur Spine J. 2008;17:331–337.
PDF (RUS) Full-text article (in Russian)
Conflict of interest. The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Financing. The study had no sponsorship.
Contribution. Article was prepared with equal participation of the authors.
Article received: 20.01.2022. Accepted for publication: 25.02.2023.