Timothy N Udoji1, Gary S Phillips2, Eugene A Berkowitz3, David Berkowitz4, Cicely Ross4, Rabih I Bechara5. 1. 1 Division of Pulmonary, Allergy, Critical Care, and Sleep Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, and. 2. 2 Center for Biostatistics, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio. 3. 3 Division of Cardiothoracic Imaging, Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, and. 4. 4 Division of Pulmonary, Allergy, and Critical Care Medicine, Interventional Pulmonology, Department of Medicine, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia; and. 5. 5 Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Cancer Treatment Centers of America/Southeastern Regional Medical Center, Atlanta, and Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Medicine, Georgia Regents University, Augusta, Georgia.
Abstract
RATIONALE: Multidetector-row chest computed tomography scan is a common initial imaging modality and endobronchial ultrasound is a minimally invasive diagnostic tool used to evaluate enlarged lymph nodes, but comparisons of imaging results are lacking. OBJECTIVES: To determine the size of thoracic lymph nodes and the strength of agreement between each measurement from coronal plane computed tomography and static endobronchial ultrasound images. METHODS: A retrospective review of consecutive patients who underwent endobronchial ultrasound-transbronchial needle aspiration of their lymph nodes because of clinical suspicion of benign or malignant thoracic disease. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: One hundred and twenty-four lymph nodes from the mediastinal (74.2%) and hilar (25.8%) stations were measured in 59 patients (mean age, 64.5 yr; 33 males). The mean (standard deviation) short-axis diameter on computed tomography was 14.1 (6.7) mm compared with 12.6 (6.6) mm on endobronchial ultrasound. Benign lymph nodes (n = 42) were larger on computed tomography than on endobronchial ultrasound (14.1 [6.2] vs. 11.5 [6.2] mm). Malignant lymph nodes (n = 35) were larger on endobronchial ultrasound than on computed tomography (17.3 [6.4] vs. 16.2 [6.7] mm). Sixty-five percent of the lymph nodes that were initially interpreted as not enlarged on axial computed tomography images measured greater than 10 mm on each imaging modality (12.5 [5.9] mm on computed tomography and 10.5 [5.6] mm on endobronchial ultrasound) and 24% of the sampled lymph nodes from this group contained malignant cells. Random-effects maximal likelihood linear regression showed a statistically significant difference between endobronchial ultrasound and the computed tomography method for measuring short-axis diameter in all 124 lymph nodes. There was a weak agreement (intraclass correlation, rho: 0.44 [95% confidence interval, 0.31-0.59]) between short-axis diameter measurements from each imaging modality. CONCLUSIONS: Our single-center study shows that there was poor correlation between computed tomography and endobronchial ultrasound for the measurement of mediastinal and hilar lymph nodes. Malignant cells were recovered by ultrasound-guided needle aspiration from a substantial fraction of lymph nodes that were initially interpreted as normal in size. If these findings are confirmed, new criteria may be needed for lymph node measurement on computed tomography that will guide selection of lymph nodes for endobronchial ultrasound-transbronchial needle aspiration.
RATIONALE: Multidetector-row chest computed tomography scan is a common initial imaging modality and endobronchial ultrasound is a minimally invasive diagnostic tool used to evaluate enlarged lymph nodes, but comparisons of imaging results are lacking. OBJECTIVES: To determine the size of thoracic lymph nodes and the strength of agreement between each measurement from coronal plane computed tomography and static endobronchial ultrasound images. METHODS: A retrospective review of consecutive patients who underwent endobronchial ultrasound-transbronchial needle aspiration of their lymph nodes because of clinical suspicion of benign or malignant thoracic disease. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: One hundred and twenty-four lymph nodes from the mediastinal (74.2%) and hilar (25.8%) stations were measured in 59 patients (mean age, 64.5 yr; 33 males). The mean (standard deviation) short-axis diameter on computed tomography was 14.1 (6.7) mm compared with 12.6 (6.6) mm on endobronchial ultrasound. Benign lymph nodes (n = 42) were larger on computed tomography than on endobronchial ultrasound (14.1 [6.2] vs. 11.5 [6.2] mm). Malignant lymph nodes (n = 35) were larger on endobronchial ultrasound than on computed tomography (17.3 [6.4] vs. 16.2 [6.7] mm). Sixty-five percent of the lymph nodes that were initially interpreted as not enlarged on axial computed tomography images measured greater than 10 mm on each imaging modality (12.5 [5.9] mm on computed tomography and 10.5 [5.6] mm on endobronchial ultrasound) and 24% of the sampled lymph nodes from this group contained malignant cells. Random-effects maximal likelihood linear regression showed a statistically significant difference between endobronchial ultrasound and the computed tomography method for measuring short-axis diameter in all 124 lymph nodes. There was a weak agreement (intraclass correlation, rho: 0.44 [95% confidence interval, 0.31-0.59]) between short-axis diameter measurements from each imaging modality. CONCLUSIONS: Our single-center study shows that there was poor correlation between computed tomography and endobronchial ultrasound for the measurement of mediastinal and hilar lymph nodes. Malignant cells were recovered by ultrasound-guided needle aspiration from a substantial fraction of lymph nodes that were initially interpreted as normal in size. If these findings are confirmed, new criteria may be needed for lymph node measurement on computed tomography that will guide selection of lymph nodes for endobronchial ultrasound-transbronchial needle aspiration.
Authors: Christoph Frank Dietrich; Jouke Tabe Annema; Paul Clementsen; Xin Wu Cui; Mathias Maximilian Borst; Christian Jenssen Journal: J Thorac Dis Date: 2015-09 Impact factor: 2.895
Authors: Ayodeji Adegunsoye; Justin M Oldham; Catherine Bonham; Cara Hrusch; Paul Nolan; Wesley Klejch; Shashi Bellam; Uday Mehta; Kiran Thakrar; Janelle Vu Pugashetti; Aliya N Husain; Steven M Montner; Christopher M Straus; Rekha Vij; Anne I Sperling; Imre Noth; Mary E Strek; Jonathan H Chung Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2019-03-15 Impact factor: 21.405