| Literature DB >> 22295029 |
Nianyu Xue1, Pintong Huang, Wilbert S Aronow, Zongmin Wang, Chandra K Nair, Zhiqiang Zheng, Xuedong Shen, Yimei Yin, Fuguang Huang, David Cosgrove.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Double contrast-enhanced ultrasonography (DCUS) is a new method we used in predicting lymph node metastasis (LNM) in patients with early gastric cancer.Entities:
Keywords: contrast-enhanced ultrasonography; early gastric cancer; lymph node metastasis
Year: 2011 PMID: 22295029 PMCID: PMC3258739 DOI: 10.5114/aoms.2011.23412
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Arch Med Sci ISSN: 1734-1922 Impact factor: 3.318
Figure 1A case of EGC with LNM confirmed pathologically after operation. A: The early gastric cancer and LNM can not be detected with conventional transabdominal US. B: The early gastric cancer (white arrow) can be clearly demonstrated in the oral contrast-enhanced ultrasonography image, but LNM can not be demonstrated. C: Compared with the adjacent normal gastric wall (white arrow), marked hyperenhancement of the EGC (T) in DCUS image was shown during the early arterial phase
STO – stomach, T – tumor, GB – gallbladder, L – liver
Figure 2A case of EGC without LNM confirmed pathologically after operation. A: The early gastric cancer and LNM could not be detected with conventional transabdominal US. B: The early gastric cancer (white arrow) and LNM (green arrow) can be clearly demonstrated in the oral contrast-enhanced ultrasonography image. C: Compared with the adjacent normal gastric wall (white arrow), unmarked hyperenhancement of the EGC (green arrow) in DCUS image was shown during the early arterialphase
STO – stomach, GB – gallbladder
The sensitivity, specificity, and Youden's index of oral contrast-enhanced ultrasonography (CEUS) and double contrast-enhanced ultra - sonography (DCUS) in detecting lymph node metastasis
| Sensitivity [%] | Specificity [%] | Youden's index | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 33.3 | 98.4 | 0.317 | |
| 86.7 | 60.7 | 0.474 |
The relationship between different clinicopathological characteristics and the rate of lymph node metastasis as well as the contrast-enhanced intensity
| Factors | Node negative | Node positive | Value of | Marked hyperenhancement | Unmarked hyperenhancement | Value of p |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age [years] | 61.0 ±13.5 | 57.7 ±10.3 | 0.382 | 58.5 ±10.9 | 58.2 ±11.1 | 0.887 |
| Male | 9 | 39 | 0.777 | 21 | 27 | 0.260 |
| Female | 6 | 22 | 16 | 12 | ||
| Upper | 2 | 2 | 0.291 | 2 | 2 | 0.446 |
| Middle | 2 | 8 | 3 | 7 | ||
| Lower | 11 | 51 | 32 | 30 | ||
| Tumor diameter [mm] | 31.4 ±9.6 | 30.8 ±12.0 | 0.866 | 35.4 ±13.1 | 26.8 ±7.80 | 0.001 |
| Mucosa | 4 | 32 | 0.073 | 14 | 22 | 0.105 |
| Submucosa | 11 | 29 | 23 | 17 | ||
| Differentiated | 5 | 39 | 0.032 | 16 | 28 | 0.012 |
| Undifferentiated | 10 | 22 | 21 | 11 |