Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

The diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging and cerebrospinal fluid cytology in leptomeningeal metastasis

  • Original communication
  • Published:
Journal of Neurology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Diagnostic decision making in the case of patients suspected of having leptomeningeal metastasis (LM) can be very difficult. The results of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) cytology can be repeatedly negative, and the predictive value of gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is not well known. We report the results of CSF cytology and Gd MRI in 61 patients with known cancer, suspected of having LM. We combined our data with those from a similar study and calculated the sensitivity and specificity of CSF and Gd MRI, in the absence of a “gold standard diagnosis.” CSF cytology was positive for LM in 35 patients and MRI in 38. With CSF cytology sensitivity 75% and specificity 100%, with Gd MRI sensitivity was 76% but specificity only 77%. We conclude that Gd MRI provides strong support in the diagnosis of LM in patients with cancer who have negative results on CSF cytology.

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

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

Received: 6 July 1998 Received in revised form: 15 January 1999 Accepted: 3 March 1999

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Straathof, C., de Bruin, H., Dippel, D. et al. The diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging and cerebrospinal fluid cytology in leptomeningeal metastasis. J Neurol 246, 810–814 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1007/s004150050459

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s004150050459

Navigation