Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Imaging characteristics of tenosynovial and bursal chondromatosis

  • Scientific Article
  • Published:
Skeletal Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objectives

Our purpose was to identify imaging characteristics of tenosynovial and bursal chondromatosis.

Materials and methods

We retrospectively reviewed 25 pathologically confirmed cases of tenosynovial (n = 21) or bursal chondromatosis (n = 4). Patient demographics and clinical presentation were reviewed. Imaging was evaluated by two musculoskeletal radiologists with agreement by consensus, including radiography (n = 21), bone scintigraphy (n = 1), angiography (n = 1), ultrasonography (n = 1), CT (n = 8), and MR (n = 8). Imaging was evaluated for lesion location/shape, presence/number of calcifications, evidence of bone involvement, and intrinsic characteristics on ultrasonography/CT/MR.

Results

Average patient age was 44 years (range 7 to 75 years) with a mild male predilection (56%). A slowly increasing soft tissue mass was the most common clinical presentation (53%). Lesion locations included the foot (n = 8), hand (n = 6), shoulder (n = 3), knee (n = 2), ankle (n = 2) and one each in the upper arm, forearm, wrist, and cervical spine. All lesions were located in a known tenosynovial (21 cases, 84%) or bursal (four cases, 16%) location. All cases of bursal chondromatosis were round/oval in shape. Tenosynovial lesions were fusiform (65%) or round/oval (35%). Radiographs commonly showed a soft tissue mass (86%) and calcification (90%). Calcifications were predominantly chondroid (79%) or osteoid (11%) in character with >10 calcified bodies in 48%. CT detected calcifications in all cases. The intrinsic characteristics of the nonmineralized component showed low attenuation on CT (75%), high signal intensity on T2-weighted MR (76%) and a peripheral/septal contrast enhancement pattern (100%).

Conclusions

Imaging of tenosynovial and bursal chondromatosis is often characteristic with identification of multiple osteochondral calcifications (90% by radiographs; 100% by CT). CT and MR also revealed typical intrinsic characteristics of chondroid tissue and lesion location in a known tendon sheath or bursa.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Davis RI, Hamilton A, Biggart JD. Primary synovial chondromatosis: a clinicopathologic review and assessment of malignant potential. Hum Pathol. 1998;29(7):683–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Dahlin DC, Salvador AH. Cartilaginous tumors of the soft tissues of the hands and feet. Mayo Clin Proc. 1974;49(10):721–6.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Fetsch JF, et al. Tenosynovial (extraarticular) chondromatosis: an analysis of 37 cases of an underrecognized clinicopathologic entity with a strong predilection for the hands and feet and a high local recurrence rate. Am J Surg Pathol. 2003;27(9):1260–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Lichtenstein L, Goldman RL. Cartilage tumors in soft tissues particularly in the hand and foot. Cancer. 1964;17:1203–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Sim FH, Dahlin DC, Ivins JC. Extra-articular synovial chondromatosis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1977;59(4):492–5.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Murphey MD, et al. Imaging of synovial chondromatosis with radiologic-pathologic correlation. Radiographics. 2007;27(5):1465–88.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Roberts D, Miller TT, Erlanger SM. Sonographic appearance of primary synovial chondromatosis of the knee. J Ultrasound Med. 2004;23(5):707–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Villacin AB, Brigham LN, Bullough PG. Primary and secondary synovial chondrometaplasia: histopathologic and clinicoradiologic differences. Hum Pathol. 1979;10(4):439–51.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Wittkop B, Davies AM, Mangham DC. Primary synovial chondromatosis and synovial chondrosarcoma: a pictorial review. Eur Radiol. 2002;12(8):2112–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. DeBenedetti MJ, Schwinn CP. Tenosynovial chondromatosis in the hand. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1979;61(6A):898–903.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Patel MR, Desai SS. Tenosynovial osteochondromatosis of the extensor tendon of a digit: case report and review of the literature. J Hand Surg Am. 1985;10(5):716–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Someren A, Merritt WH. Tenosynovial chondroma of the hand: a case report with a brief review of the literature. Hum Pathol. 1978;9(4):476–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Bui-Mansfield LT, Rohini D, Bagg M. Tenosynovial chondromatosis of the ring finger. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2005;184(4):1223–4.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Lynn MD, Lee J. Periarticular tenosynovial chondrometaplasia. Report of a case at the wrist. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1972;54(3):650–2.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Metha JA, Bignold LP, Pope RO. Intraarticular rupture of digital tenosynovial calcification: an unusual case of acute arthritis of the finger. J Rheumatol. 1999;26(7):1643–4.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Cohen EK, et al. Hyaline cartilage-origin bone and soft-tissue neoplasms: MR appearance and histologic correlation. Radiology. 1988;167(2):477–81.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Murphey MD, et al. From the archives of the AFIP: imaging of primary chondrosarcoma: radiologic-pathologic correlation. Radiographics. 2003;23(5):1245–78.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Chung EB, Enzinger FM. Chondroma of soft parts. Cancer. 1978;41(4):1414–24.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Weiss SW, Goldblum JR. Enzinger and Weiss's soft tissue tumors. In: Weiss SW, editor. Cartilaginous soft tissue tumors. 4th ed. St. Louis: Mosby; 2001. 1632.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Fetsch JF, Miettinen M. Calcifying aponeurotic fibroma: a clinicopathologic study of 22 cases arising in uncommon sites. Hum Pathol. 1998;29(12):1504–10.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Morii T, et al. Clinical significance of magnetic resonance imaging in the preoperative differential diagnosis of calcifying aponeurotic fibroma. J Orthop Sci. 2008;13(3):180–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Torreggiani WC, et al. MR imaging features of bizarre parosteal osteochondromatous proliferation of bone (Nora's lesion). Eur J Radiol. 2001;40(3):224–31.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Murphey MD, et al. Pigmented villonodular synovitis: radiologic-pathologic correlation. Radiographics. 2008;28(5):1493–518.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Baker ND, et al. Pigmented villonodular synovitis containing coarse calcifications. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1989;153(6):1228–30.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Karasick D, Karasick S. Giant cell tumor of tendon sheath: spectrum of radiologic findings. Skeletal Radiol. 1992;21(4):219–24.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Jelinek JS, et al. Giant cell tumor of the tendon sheath: MR findings in nine cases. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1994;162(4):919–22.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Murphey MD, et al. From the archives of the AFIP: imaging of synovial sarcoma with radiologic-pathologic correlation. Radiographics. 2006;26(5):1543–65.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgment

The authors gratefully acknowledge the residents who attend the AFIP radiologic pathology courses (past, present, and future) for their contribution to our series of patients.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiologic Pathology, Armed Forces Institute of Pathology, 6825 16th Street NW, Building 54, Room M-133A, Washington, DC, 20306, USA

    Mark D. Murphey

  2. Department of Soft Tissue Pathology, Armed Forces Institute of Pathology, 6825 16th Street NW, Building 54, Room M-133A, Washington, DC, 20306, USA

    John F. Fetsch

  3. Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Bethesda, MD, USA

    Eric A. Walker & Mark D. Murphey

  4. Department of Radiology, Milton S. Hershey Medical Center, Hershey, PA, USA

    Eric A. Walker

Authors
  1. Eric A. Walker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mark D. Murphey
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. John F. Fetsch
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Eric A. Walker.

Additional information

The opinions or assertions contained herein are the private views of the authors and are not to be construed as official or as reflecting the views of the Departments of the Army, Navy, or Defense.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Walker, E.A., Murphey, M.D. & Fetsch, J.F. Imaging characteristics of tenosynovial and bursal chondromatosis. Skeletal Radiol 40, 317–325 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00256-010-1012-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00256-010-1012-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation