Literature DB >> 15138355

Lymph node diagnosis in oncologic imaging: a dilemma still waiting to be solved.

W A Golder1.   

Abstract

The recognition of lymph node involvement is still one of the most challenging topics of diagnostic radiooncology. Above size, shape and contours, the intrinsic architecture of the node, its vessels and its metabolic activity are assessed and used for diagnostic conclusions. Conventional ultrasound has a high sensitivity for detecting enlarged lymph nodes, whereas its specificity is moderate. Tumor-associated alterations of intranodal angioarchitecture are not specific enough to allow reliable differential diagnosis of lymphadenopathy by color-coded Doppler ultrasound. Power Doppler ultrasound improved distinction between inflamed, reactive and metastatic nodes. Computed tomography (CT) is most widely used to detect and characterize lymph nodes in regions unaccessible to percutaneous ultrasound. However, diffuse lymph node enlargement secondary to infectious or granulomatous diseases cannot be discriminated from metastases or systemic lymphoma. Positron emission tomography (PET) provides superior staging information, as it offers functional information on tissue activity and has better sensitivity and specificity than CT for revealing neoplastic foci. Dual modality scanners (CT + PET) aid precise localization of diseased lymph nodes and give unique information regarding the activity of residual tumor tissue. Magnetic resonance (MR) imaging is comparable to CT in identifying lymph nodes. However, even quantitative assessment of signal intensity does not permit reliable follow-up of disease activity. MR lymphography opens a new chance to avoid understaging due to microscopic tumor invasion and overstaging due to peritumoural inflammation. With the expansion of this and other advanced techniques the need for invasive lymph node diagnosis will lessen. Copyright 2004 S. Karger GmbH, Freiburg

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15138355     DOI: 10.1159/000076912

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Onkologie        ISSN: 0378-584X


  8 in total

1.  Preoperative assessment of para-aortic lymph node metastasis in patients with pancreatic cancer.

Authors:  Hisashi Imai; Ryuichiro Doi; Hiroyuki Kanazawa; Naoko Kamo; Masayuki Koizumi; Toshihiko Masui; Yasuhiro Iwanaga; Yoshiya Kawaguchi; Yasutsugu Takada; Hiroyoshi Isoda; Shinji Uemoto
Journal:  Int J Clin Oncol       Date:  2010-03-16       Impact factor: 3.402

2.  Gastric mass.

Authors:  Jedediah A Kaufman; Dave Lal; Melissa P Upton; Carlos A Pellegrini; Brant K Oelschlager
Journal:  MedGenMed       Date:  2005-04-04

3.  Automated measurement of lymph nodes: a phantom study.

Authors:  Sebastian Keil; Cedric Plumhans; Florian F Behrendt; Sven Stanzel; Michael Suehling; Georg Mühlenbruch; Andreas H Mahnken; Rolf W Günther; Marco Das
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2008-12-24       Impact factor: 5.315

4.  Assessment of lymph node metastases by contrast-enhanced MR imaging in a head and neck cancer model.

Authors:  Ki Chang Lee; Woo Kyung Moon; Jin Wook Chung; Seung Hong Choi; Nariya Cho; Joo Hee Cha; Eun Hye Lee; Sun Mi Kim; Hoe Suk Kim; Moon Hee Han; Kee Hyun Chang
Journal:  Korean J Radiol       Date:  2007 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 3.500

5.  The impact of 18F-FDG PET on initial staging and therapy planning of pediatric soft-tissue sarcoma patients.

Authors:  Alaa Elmanzalawy; Reza Vali; Govind B Chavhan; Abha A Gupta; Yusuf Omarkhail; Afsaneh Amirabadi; Amer Shammas
Journal:  Pediatr Radiol       Date:  2019-10-18

Review 6.  Computed tomography versus magnetic resonance imaging for diagnosing cervical lymph node metastasis of head and neck cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  J Sun; B Li; C J Li; Y Li; F Su; Q H Gao; F L Wu; T Yu; L Wu; L J Li
Journal:  Onco Targets Ther       Date:  2015-06-08       Impact factor: 4.147

Review 7.  Review of clinical practice utility of positron emission tomography with 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose in assessing tumour response to therapy.

Authors:  Andrea d'Amico
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2014-08-26       Impact factor: 3.469

8.  EANM/SNMMI practice guideline for [18F]FDG PET/CT external beam radiotherapy treatment planning in uterine cervical cancer v1.0.

Authors:  Judit A Adam; Annika Loft; Cyrus Chargari; Roberto C Delgado Bolton; Elisabeth Kidd; Heiko Schöder; Patrick Veit-Haibach; Wouter V Vogel
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2020-12-04       Impact factor: 9.236

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.