Role of MRI in Characterizing Spine and Spinal Cord Tumors Based on Anatomical Level, Tumor Position, Lesion Length, Cord Expansion, and Morphological MRI Features

Article Sidebar

Full Text PDF
Published: 2026-05-30
DOI: https://doi.org/10.61919/1607ry57
Keywords:
Spinal Cord Tumors, Spine Tumors, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Cord Expansion, Extradural Tumors, Intramedullary Tumors, Morphological Features, Tumor Characterization.

Main Article Content

Syeda Eman Shah
Al Razi Institute, Lahore, Pakistan
Hafiza Maria Fawad
Head of Department, Al Razi Institute, Lahore, Pakistan
Tayyaba Iqbal
Lecturer, Al Razi Institute, Lahore, Pakistan
Noor ul Hassan Butt
Al Razi Institute, Lahore, Pakistan
Musfirah Khalid
Al Razi Institute, Lahore, Pakistan
Hira Nadeem
Al Razi Institute, Lahore, Pakistan
Atiqa Aziz
Al Razi Institute, Lahore, Pakistan
Mubashir Farhan
Al Razi Institute, Lahore, Pakistan

Abstract

Background: Spine and spinal cord tumors are clinically important lesions because delayed recognition may lead to pain, sensory disturbance, myelopathy, neurological disability, and functional decline. Magnetic resonance imaging is the principal modality for evaluating these tumors because it provides detailed visualization of tumor compartment, cord morphology, margins, and adjacent structural involvement. Objective: To describe the role of conventional MRI in characterizing spine and spinal cord tumors according to anatomical and morphological imaging features in adult patients. Methods: This prospective descriptive cross-sectional observational study was conducted at Lahore General Hospital over 90 days after synopsis approval. Sixty adult patients aged 18 years and above with spine or spinal cord tumors and complete preoperative MRI studies were included. MRI was performed using conventional T1-weighted, T2-weighted, STIR, and post-contrast T1-weighted sequences. Clinical symptoms and MRI features, including cord expansion, lesion morphology, margin definition, tumor compartment, bone involvement, and disc involvement, were analyzed descriptively using SPSS version 27.0. Results: The mean age was 47.68 ± 15.81 years, and females comprised 53.3% of participants. Numbness was reported in 51.7%, loss of sensation in 50.0%, and lower back pain and radiating pain each in 48.3%. Extradural location was recorded in 53.3%, bone and disc involvement each in 51.7%, well-defined margins in 50.0%, and cord expansion and intramedullary location each in 48.3%. Conclusion: Conventional MRI provided useful anatomical and morphological characterization of spine and spinal cord tumors, particularly for identifying tumor compartment, cord expansion, lesion margins, and adjacent bone or disc involvement. Further studies with histopathological correlation and standardized reporting are needed

Article Details

Issue

Vol. 4 No. 10 (2026)

Section

Articles
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

How to Cite

1.
Syeda Eman Shah, Hafiza Maria Fawad, Tayyaba Iqbal, Noor ul Hassan Butt, Musfirah Khalid, Hira Nadeem, et al. Role of MRI in Characterizing Spine and Spinal Cord Tumors Based on Anatomical Level, Tumor Position, Lesion Length, Cord Expansion, and Morphological MRI Features. JHWCR [Internet]. 2026 May 30 [cited 2026 Jun. 26];4(10):1-9. Available from: https://jhwcr.com/index.php/jhwcr/article/view/1789

References

1. De Paiva JL, Sabino JV, Pereira FV, Okuda PA, de Lima Villarinho L, de Souza Queiroz L, et al. The role of MRI in the diagnosis of spinal cord tumors. Semin Ultrasound CT MR. 2023;44(5):436-451.

2. Chung JY, Lee JJ, Kim HJ, Seo HY. Characterization of magnetic resonance images for spinal cord tumors. Asian Spine J. 2008;2(1):15.

3. Kim GU, Chang MC, Kim TU, Lee GW. Diagnostic modality in spine disease: a review. Asian Spine J. 2020;14(6):910-920.

4. Amadasu E, Panther E, Lucke-Wold B. Characterization and treatment of spinal tumors. Intensive Care Res. 2022;2(3):76-95.

5. Van Goethem JWM, Van den Hauwe L, Özsarlak Ö, De Schepper AMA, Parizel PM. Spinal tumors. Eur J Radiol. 2004;50(2):159-176.

6. Mariano R, Flanagan EP, Weinshenker BG, Palace J. A practical approach to the diagnosis of spinal cord lesions. Pract Neurol. 2018;18(3):187-200.

7. Maj E, Wójtowicz K, Podlecka-Piętowska A, Prokopienko M, Marchel A, et al. Intramedullary spinal tumor-like lesions. Acta Radiol. 2019;60(8):994-1010.

8. Samartzis D, Gillis CC, Shih P, O’Toole JE, Fessler RG. Intramedullary spinal cord tumors: part I—epidemiology, pathophysiology, and diagnosis. Global Spine J. 2015;5(5):425-435.

9. Samartzis D, Gillis CC, Shih P, O’Toole JE, Fessler RG. Intramedullary spinal cord tumors: part II—management options and outcomes. Global Spine J. 2016;6(2):176-185.

10. Won YI, Choi Y, Yuh WT, Kwon SW, Kim CH, Yang SH, Chung CK. Validity of magnetic resonance imaging in the primary spinal cord tumors in routine clinical setting. Sci Rep. 2022;12(1):10151.

11. Maj E, Szemplinska B, Szeszkowski W, Prokopienko M, Cieszanowski A, Marchel A, Rowinski O. Role of diffusion tensor imaging parameters in the characterization and differentiation of infiltrating and non-infiltrating spinal cord tumors: preliminary study. Clin Neuroradiol. 2020;30(4):739-747.

12. Ge L, Arul K, Mesfin A. Spinal cord injury from spinal tumors: prevalence, management, and outcomes. World Neurosurg. 2019;122:e1551-e1556.

13. Molina CA, Gokaslan ZL, Sciubba DM. Diagnosis and management of metastatic cervical spine tumors. Orthop Clin North Am. 2012;43(1):75-87.

14. Baruah D, Chandra T, Bajaj M, Sonowal P, Klein A, Maheshwari M, Guleria S. A simplified algorithm for diagnosis of spinal cord lesions. Curr Probl Diagn Radiol. 2015;44(3):256-266.

15. Garg S, Bhagyashree SR. Spinal cord MRI segmentation techniques and algorithms: a survey. SN Comput Sci. 2021;2(3):229.

16. Munakomi S. Case report: multiple extradural thoracic lesions with myelopathy as the clinical presentation in systemic sarcoidosis—another tale of a lurking entity. F1000Res. 2018;7:6.