Acute invasive fungal rhinosinusitis: MR imaging features and their impact on prognosis
Acute invasive fungal rhinosinusitis (AIFRS) is a life-threatening disease that is difficult to diagnose. Its overall imaging features have not been evaluated and the prognostic impact is unclear. The purpose of our study was to present MR imaging features and their impact on prognosis of AIFRS.
MR images and clinical records of 23 patients with AIFRS were retrospectively evaluated to identify the imaging features and to determine the factors affecting patients’ survival. A multivariable Cox proportional hazard model was used to estimate the hazard ratio of the prognostic factors, and Kaplan-Meier survival curves were compared by using a log-rank test.
All cases showed extra-sinonasal involvement and the orbit was the most common (65.2%, 15/23) location. The lesion enhancement pattern was classified into lack of contrast enhancement (LoCE) (47.8%, 11/23) and homogeneous (34.8%, 8/23) and heterogeneous (17.4%, 4/23) enhancement. Although LoCE showed variable signal intensity (SI), homogeneously or heterogeneously enhancing lesions showed exclusively low SI (100%, 12/12) on T2WI. Among various clinical and imaging factors, LoCE was correlated with coagulation necrosis, probably provoked by numerous fungal hyphae, and was found to be a sole independent prognostic factor for disease-specific mortality (hazard ratio = 16.819; 95% CI, 1.646–171.841, p = 0.017). In addition, patients with LoCE showed worse survival than patients without LoCE (p = 0.008).
AIFRS showed frequent extra-sinonasal involvement and variable MR enhancement patterns. An enhancement pattern of LoCE was seen in about half of the cases and was a unique prognostic factor among the various clinico-radiologic factors.
KeywordsAcute invasive fungal rhinosinusitis Lack of contrast enhancement Magnetic resonance imaging Coagulative necrosis Prognosis
Acute invasive fungal rhinosinusitis
Lack of contrast enhancement
Compliance with ethical standards
No funding was received for this study.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
All procedures performed in the studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. For this type of study formal consent is not required.
For this type of retrospective study formal consent is not required.
- 1.Pagano L, Caira M, Candoni A, Offidani M, Fianchi L, Martino B, Pastore D, Picardi M, Bonini A, Chierichini A, Fanci R, Caramatti C, Invernizzi R, Mattei D, Mitra ME, Melillo L, Aversa F, van Lint M, Falcucci P, Valentini CG, Girmenia C, Nosari A (2006) The epidemiology of fungal infections in patients with hematologic malignancies: the SEIFEM-2004 study. Haematologica 91(8):1068–1075PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 2.Valera FC, do Lago T, Tamashiro E, Yassuda CC, Silveira F, Anselmo-Lima WT (2011) Prognosis of acute invasive fungal rhinosinusitis related to underlying disease. Int J Infect Dis 15(12)Google Scholar
- 15.Arunaloke C, Denning DW, Ferguson BJ, Ponikau J, Buzina W, Kita H et al (2011) Fungal rhinosinusitis: a categorization and definitional schema addressing current controversies. QNRS Repository 2011(1):3063Google Scholar