Literature DB >> 21636663

Using endobronchial ultrasound features to predict lymph node metastasis in patients with lung cancer.

Jessica S Wang Memoli1, Ezzat El-Bayoumi2, Nicholas J Pastis3, Nichole T Tanner3, Mario Gomez4, J Terrill Huggins3, Georgiana Onicescu5, Elizabeth Garrett-Mayer5, Kent Armeson5, Katherine K Taylor3, Gerard A Silvestri6.   

Abstract

PURPOSES: Reliable staging of the mediastinum determines TNM classification and directs therapy for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Our aim was to evaluate predictors of mediastinal lymph node metastasis in patients undergoing endobronchial ultrasound (EBUS).
METHODS: Patients with known or suspected lung cancer undergoing EBUS for staging were included. Lymph node radiographic characteristics on chest CT/PET scan and ultrasound characteristics of size, shape, border, echogenicity, and number were correlated with rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE) and final pathology. Logistic regression (estimated with generalized estimating equations to account for correlation across nodes within patients) was used with cancer (vs normal pathology) as the outcome. ORs compare risks across groups, and testing was performed with two-sided α of 0.05.
RESULTS: Two hundred twenty-seven distinct lymph nodes (22.5% positive for malignancy) were evaluated in 100 patients. Lymph node size, by CT scan and EBUS measurements, and round and oval shape were predictive of mediastinal metastasis. Increasing size of lymph nodes on EBUS was associated with increasing malignancy risk (P = .0002). When adjusted for CT scan size, hypermetabolic lymph nodes on PET scan did not predict malignancy. Echogenicity and border contour on EBUS and site of biopsy were not significantly associated with cancer. In 94.8% of lymph nodes with a clear diagnosis, the ROSE of the first pass correlated with subsequent passes.
CONCLUSIONS: Lymph node size on CT scan and EBUS and round or oval shape by EBUS are predictors of malignancy, but no single characteristic can exclude a visualized lymph node from biopsy. Further, increasing the number of samples taken is unlikely to significantly improve sensitivity.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21636663      PMCID: PMC3231960          DOI: 10.1378/chest.11-0252

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Chest        ISSN: 0012-3692            Impact factor:   9.410


  19 in total

1.  Endobronchial sonography: feasibility and preliminary results.

Authors:  T Hürter; P Hanrath
Journal:  Thorax       Date:  1992-07       Impact factor: 9.139

2.  Rapid on-site evaluation of transbronchial aspirates in the diagnosis of hilar and mediastinal adenopathy: a randomized trial.

Authors:  Rocco Trisolini; Alessandra Cancellieri; Carmine Tinelli; Daniela Paioli; Luigia Scudeller; Gian Piero Casadei; Sergio Forti Parri; Vanina Livi; Arrigo Bondi; Maurizio Boaron; Marco Patelli
Journal:  Chest       Date:  2010-10-28       Impact factor: 9.410

Review 3.  Sonographic evaluation of cervical lymph nodes.

Authors:  Anil T Ahuja; Michael Ying
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2005-05       Impact factor: 3.959

4.  Regional lymph node classification for lung cancer staging.

Authors:  C F Mountain; C M Dresler
Journal:  Chest       Date:  1997-06       Impact factor: 9.410

5.  Endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration of lymph nodes in the radiologically normal mediastinum.

Authors:  F J F Herth; A Ernst; R Eberhardt; P Vilmann; H Dienemann; M Krasnik
Journal:  Eur Respir J       Date:  2006-06-28       Impact factor: 16.671

6.  A comparison of the accuracy of echo features during endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) and EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration for diagnosis of malignant lymph node invasion.

Authors:  M S Bhutani; R H Hawes; B J Hoffman
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  1997-06       Impact factor: 9.427

7.  A comparative analysis of positron emission tomography and mediastinoscopy in staging non-small cell lung cancer.

Authors:  Gonzalo V Gonzalez-Stawinski; Anthony Lemaire; Faisal Merchant; Elizabeth O'Halloran; R Edward Coleman; David H Harpole; Thomas A D'Amico
Journal:  J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 5.209

8.  Endoscopic ultrasound in lung cancer patients with a normal mediastinum on computed tomography.

Authors:  Michael B Wallace; James Ravenel; Mark I Block; Mostafa Fraig; Gerard Silvestri; Stephan Wildi; Nathan Schmulewitz; Shyam Varadarajulu; Stacey Roberts; Brenda J Hoffman; Robert H Hawes; Carolyn E Reed
Journal:  Ann Thorac Surg       Date:  2004-05       Impact factor: 4.330

9.  Endosonographic features predictive of lymph node metastasis.

Authors:  M F Catalano; M V Sivak; T Rice; L A Gragg; J Van Dam
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  1994 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 9.427

10.  Accuracy of EUS criteria and primary tumor site for identification of mediastinal lymph node metastasis from non-small-cell lung cancer.

Authors:  Nathan Schmulewitz; Stephan M Wildi; Shyam Varadarajulu; Stacey Roberts; Robert H Hawes; Brenda J Hoffman; Valerie Durkalski; Gerard A Silvestri; Mark I Block; Carolyn Reed; Michael B Wallace
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2004-02       Impact factor: 9.427

View more
  23 in total

Review 1.  Ultrasound techniques in the evaluation of the mediastinum, part 2: mediastinal lymph node anatomy and diagnostic reach of ultrasound techniques, clinical work up of neoplastic and inflammatory mediastinal lymphadenopathy using ultrasound techniques and how to learn mediastinal endosonography.

Authors:  Christian Jenssen; Jouke Tabe Annema; Paul Clementsen; Xin-Wu Cui; Mathias Maximilian Borst; Christoph Frank Dietrich
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2015-10       Impact factor: 2.895

2.  Needle-based Optical Coherence Tomography to Guide Transbronchial Lymph Node Biopsy.

Authors:  Eugene Shostak; Lida P Hariri; George Z Cheng; David C Adams; Melissa J Suter
Journal:  J Bronchology Interv Pulmonol       Date:  2018-07

3.  Optimal Endobronchial Ultrasound Strain Elastography Assessment Strategy: An Explorative Study.

Authors:  Roel L J Verhoeven; Chris L de Korte; Erik H F M van der Heijden
Journal:  Respiration       Date:  2018-12-14       Impact factor: 3.580

Review 4.  Recent advances in diagnostic bronchoscopy.

Authors:  Philip G Ong; Labib G Debiane; Roberto F Casal
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2016-12       Impact factor: 2.895

Review 5.  Clinical year in review II: mechanical ventilation, acute respiratory distress syndrome, critical care, and lung cancer.

Authors:  M Elizabeth Wilcox; M Patricia Rivera; Catherine Sassoon; Lorraine B Ware; Hannah Wunsch; Margaret S Herridge
Journal:  Proc Am Thorac Soc       Date:  2012-10

6.  Understanding local performance data for EBUS-TBNA: insights from an unselected case series at a high volume UK center.

Authors:  Vandana Jeebun; Richard Neil Harrison
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2017-05       Impact factor: 2.895

7.  Comparison of specimen adequacy and diagnostic accuracy of a 25-gauge and 22-gauge needle in endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration.

Authors:  Christopher Di Felice; Benjamin Young; Maroun Matta
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2019-08       Impact factor: 2.895

8.  Endoscopic ultrasound: Elastographic lymph node evaluation.

Authors:  Christoph F Dietrich; Christian Jenssen; Paolo G Arcidiacono; Xin-Wu Cui; Marc Giovannini; Michael Hocke; Julio Iglesias-Garcia; Adrian Saftoiu; Siyu Sun; Liliana Chiorean
Journal:  Endosc Ultrasound       Date:  2015 Jul-Sep       Impact factor: 5.628

9.  Accuracy and Reproducibility of Endoscopic Ultrasound B-Mode Features for Observer-Based Lymph Nodal Malignancy Prediction.

Authors:  Roel L J Verhoeven; Fausto Leoncini; Jorik Slotman; Chris de Korte; Rocco Trisolini; Erik H F M van der Heijden
Journal:  Respiration       Date:  2021-06-24       Impact factor: 3.580

10.  The changes on anesthetic practice for non-intubated bronchoscopic interventions during Covid-19 pandemic.

Authors:  Yi-Chun Lo; Su-Chuan Han; Ching-Kai Lin; Chung-Chih Shih; Ya-Jung Cheng
Journal:  J Formos Med Assoc       Date:  2021-07-12       Impact factor: 3.282

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.