Àá½Ã¸¸ ±â´Ù·Á ÁÖ¼¼¿ä. ·ÎµùÁßÀÔ´Ï´Ù.

ÃøµÎ°ñ Langerhans¼¼Æ÷Á¶Á÷±¸ÁõÀÇ MR ¹× CT ¼Ò°ß MR and CT Findings of Temporal Bone Langerhans Cell Histiocytosis

´ëÇѹæ»ç¼±ÀÇÇÐȸÁö 2001³â 45±Ç 5È£ p.513 ~ 518
¼Ò¼Ó »ó¼¼Á¤º¸
¹èÀçÀÍ/Jae Ig Bae ÀÌÈñÁ¤/±èÈï½Ä*/Hee Jung Lee/Heung Sik Kim*

Abstract

¸ñ ¸ñÀû Àû::ÃøµÎ°ñÀ» ħ¹üÇÑ Langerhans¼¼Æ÷Á¶Á÷±¸ÁõÀÇ MR ¹× CT ¼Ò°ßÀ» ¾Ë¾Æº¸°íÀÚ ÇÏ¿´´Ù.
´ë ´ë»ó »ó°ú °ú ¹æ ¹æ¹ý ¹ý::6¸íÀÇ È¯¾Æ¿¡¼­ ¹ß»ýÇÑ 9¿¹ º´º¯ÀÇ ÃøµÎ°ñ Langerhans¼¼Æ÷Á¶Á÷±¸ÁõÀÇ MR (n=8)¹× CT (n=7)¼Ò°ßÀ»
ÈÄÇâÀûÀ¸·Î ºÐ¼®ÇÏ¿´´Ù.8¿¹ÀÇ º´º¯Àº Á¶Á÷ÇÐÀû ¼Ò°ßÀ¸·Î È®ÁøµÇ¾ú°í 1¿¹´Â ÀÓ»óÀûÀ¸·Î Áø´ÜµÇ¾ú´Ù.¿µ»ó¼Ò°ßÀº º´º¯
ÀÇ ¾çÃø¼º,À§Ä¡,ħ¹ü¹üÀ§,¿¬ºÎÁ¶Á÷º´º¯ÀÇ MR¿¡¼­ÀÇ ½ÅÈ£°­µµ¿Í Á¶¿µÁõ°­Àü CT¿¡¼­ÀÇ À½¿µ,Á¶¿µÁõ°­ ¾ç»ó,CT ¼Ò
°ß¿¡¼­ °ñÆı«ÀÇ ¾ç»ó,µîÀ» ºÐ¼®ÇÏ¿´´Ù.
°á °á°ú °ú::¾çÃø¼º º´º¯Àº 3¸í(50%)À̾ú´Ù.º´º¯ÀÇ À§Ä¡´Â À¯¾çµ¹±â°¡ 8¿¹(89%)·Î °¡Àå ¸¹¾Ò°í ÃßüºÎ 6¿¹(67%),ÀκÎÃø
µÎ°ñ 3¿¹(33%)ÀÇ ¼øÀ̾ú´Ù.7¿¹(56%)ÀÇ º´º¯ÀÌ µ¿ÃøÀÇ Çظ鵿(n=3),Á¢Çü°ñ(n=3),¾È¿Í(n=2),¹× °æ¸·¿Ü(n=2)·Î
¿¬¼ÓÀûÀΠħ¹üÀ» º¸¿´´Ù.¿¬ºÎÁ¶Á÷º´º¯Àº T1°­Á¶¿µ»ó¿¡¼­´Â 5¿¹(63%)¿¡¼­ µ¿µî½ÅÈ£°­µµ¸¦,T2°­Á¶¿µ»ó¿¡¼­´Â 6¿¹
(75%)°¡ °í½ÅÈ£°­µµ¸¦ º¸¿´´Ù.Á¶¿µÁõ°­Àü CT¿¡¼­´Â 5¿¹(71%)°¡ µ¿µîÀ½¿µÀ» ³ªÅ¸³»¾ú´Ù.Á¶¿µÁõ°­Àº MR¿¡¼­´Â 6
¿¹(75%)¿¡¼­ ºñ±ÕÀÏÇÑ ¾ç»óÀ»,CT¿¡¼­´Â 5¿¹(71%)¿¡¼­ ±ÕÀÏÇÑ ¾ç»óÀ» º¸¿´´Ù.°ñÆı«´Â CT ¼Ò°ß»ó Àü·Ê(100%)¿¡
¼­ º¸¿´À¸³ª °ñ¸·¹ÝÀÀÀº °üÂûµÇÁö ¾Ê¾Ò°í,5¿¹(71%)¿¡¼­ ºÀÇÕÀ» °Ç³Ê°¡´Â ºÒ±ÔÄ¢ÇÑ ¾ç»óÀ» º¸¿´´Ù.
°á °á·Ð ·Ð::º´º¯ÀÌ ÁÖ·Î À¯¾çµ¹±â(89%)¿¡ À§Ä¡ÇÏ°í,¿¬ºÎÁ¶Á÷º´º¯ÀÌ T1°­Á¶¿µ»ó¿¡¼­ µ¿µî½ÅÈ£°­µµ(63%)¸¦ º¸ÀÌ°í ȤÀº
Á¶¿µÁõ°£Àü CT¿¡¼­ µ¿µîÀ½¿µ(71%)À̸鼭 ºñ±³Àû ±ÕÀÏÇÑ Á¶¿µÁõ°­ (51%)À» º¸À̸ç,ºÀÇÕÀ» °Ç³Ê°¡´Â ºÒ±ÔÄ¢ÇÑ °ñÆÄ
±«(71%)¼Ò°ßÀÌ °üÂûµÇ¸é ÃøµÎ¿± Langerhans¼¼Æ÷Á¶Á÷±¸ÁõÀ» ½Ã»çÇÏ´Â °ÍÀ¸·Î »ç·áµÈ´Ù.

Purpose: To describe the MRI and CT findings of temporal bone Langerhans cell histi-ocytosis.
Materials and Methods: The MRI (n=8) and CT (n=7) findings of nine lesions of tem-poral
bone Langerhans cell histiocytosis in six children were retrospectively reviewed.
Eight lesions were pathologically confirmed and one was clinically diagnosed. The
findings were analyzed for bilaterality, location, lesion extent, signal intensity, the at-tenuation
of soft tissue lesions seen at MRI or precontrast CT, enhancement pattern at
MRI or CT, and the pattern of bony destruction at CT.
Results: Bilateral involvement was present in three of six patients (50%). Lesions were
most frequently located in the mastoid (n=8, 89%), followed by the petrous ridge
(n=6, 67%), and the squamous portion (n=3, 33%). Seven (78%) lesions extended to
the ipsilateral cavernous sinus (n=3), sphenoid bone (n=3), orbit (n=2), or epidural
space (n=2). The signals of the soft tissue lesions were isointense in five cases (63%)
on T1-weighted images and hyperintense in six (75%) on T2-weighted images. Five le-sions
(71%) were isodense on precontrast CT scans. The enhancement patterns were
inhomogeneous in six cases (75%) at MRI, and homogeneous in five (71%) at CT. All
lesions demonstrated bony destruction without periosteal reaction and five (71%)
showed ill-defined destruction, with crossing sutures.
Conclusion: Familiarity with findings of predominant mastoid involvement, isoin-tense
or isodense soft tissue lesions seen on T1-weighted images or at precontrast CT,
with relatively homogeneous enhancement at CT, and irregular bony destruction with
crossing sutures may be helpful in narrowing the diagnosis of temporal bone
Langerhans cell histiocytosis.

Å°¿öµå

Histiocytosis; Neoplasms; in infants and children; Temporal bone; CT;

¿ø¹® ¹× ¸µÅ©¾Æ¿ô Á¤º¸

µîÀçÀú³Î Á¤º¸

KoreaMed
KAMS