| Literature DB >> 34518977 |
Michiel Zeeuw1, Rutger Mahieu1, Bart de Keizer2, Remco de Bree3.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Sentinel lymph-node (SLN) mapping for early-stage oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) is comprehensive and consequently time-consuming and costly. This study evaluated the clinical value of several SLN imaging components and analyzed the accuracy for SLN identification using a streamlined SLN imaging protocol in early-stage OSCC.Entities:
Keywords: Lymphatic metastases; Lymphoscintigraphy; Mouth neoplasms; Sentinel lymph-node biopsy; Single photon emission computed tomography computed tomography
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34518977 PMCID: PMC8557191 DOI: 10.1007/s12149-021-01677-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Ann Nucl Med ISSN: 0914-7187 Impact factor: 2.668
Components and duration of the conventional and streamlined SLN imaging protocol
| Conventional protocol | Streamlined protocol | |
|---|---|---|
| Early planar dynamic LSG; in minutes | 30:00 | 10:00 |
| Early planar static LSG; in minutes | ||
| Anterior view | 4:30 | Omitted |
| Anterior-oblique view L+R | 9:00 | Omitted |
| SPECT-CT; in minutes | 35:00 | 35:00 |
| Late planar static LSG; in minutes | ||
| Anterior view | 4:30 | Omitted |
| Anterior-oblique view L+R | 9:00 | Omitted |
| Total; in minutes | 92:00 | 45:00 |
SLN sentinel lymph node, LSG lymphoscintigraphy, L left, R right
Fig. 1LSG lymphoscintigraphic, SLN sentinel lymph node
Patient and tumor characteristics
| Characteristics | |
|---|---|
| Gender | |
| Male (%) | 45 (58.4%) |
| Female (%) | 32 (41.6%) |
| Age at scan; mean (± SD) in years | 62.5 (± 13.0) |
| Previous neck treatment | |
| None (%) | 68 (88.3%) |
| Neck dissection (%) | 4 (5.2%) |
| Radiotherapy (%) | 3 (3.9%) |
| Neck dissection and chemoradiation (%) | 2 (2.6%) |
| Anatomical localization primary tumor | |
| Tongue (%) | 46 (59.7%) |
| Floor-of-mouth (%) | 14 (18.2%) |
| Buccal mucosa (%) | 8 (10.4%) |
| Retromolar area (%) | 5 (6.5%) |
| Inferior alveolar process (%) | 4 (5.2%) |
| Clinical T-stage primary tumor | |
| cT1 (%) | 31 (40.3%) |
| cT2 (%) | 40 (51.9%) |
| cT3 (%) | 6 (7.8%) |
| Pathological N-stage | |
| N0 (%) | 58 (75.3%) |
| N1 (%) | 8 (10.4%) |
| N2a (%) | 1 (1.3%) |
| N2b (%) | 5 (6.5%) |
| N2c (%) | 3 (3.9%) |
| N3b (%) | 2 (2.6%) |
| Follow-up time; mean (± SD) in months | 14.9 (± 7.2) |
TNM-staging according to AJCC UICC 8th Edition [12, 13]
SD standard deviation
Patients with additionally detected SLNs based on conventional imaging components
| Patient | Primary tumor | SLNs on streamlined protocol | PA | Additionally identified SLNs | Based on which image | PA extra SLN | Follow-up time (months) | Follow-up status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Tongue R | IIa R | − | IIb R | Early static oblique | − | 22 | NED |
| III R | − | |||||||
| III L | n.s.r | IIb R | Early static oblique | − | ||||
| IV R | n.s.r | |||||||
| 2 | Buccal mucosa L | III R | − | Va L | Early static AP | n.s.r | 21 | NED |
| 3 | Inferior alveolar process L | Ib L | n.s.r | IIa L | Early static oblique | − | 11 | Local recurrence |
| IIa L | + | |||||||
| 4 | Inferior alveolar process R | None | IIa R | Early static oblique | − | 21 | NED | |
| Ib R | Late static oblique | − | ||||||
| 5 | Buccal mucosa L | Ib L | + | IIa L | Early static oblique | n.s.r | 19 | NED |
| 6 | Tongue R | IIa R | − | Ib R | Early static oblique | n.s.r | 16 | NED |
| III R | − | |||||||
| 7 | Tongue L | IIa L | − | Ib L | Early static oblique | − | 15 | NED |
| 8 | Retromolar area R | IIa R | − | IIa R | Late static oblique | − | 11 | NED |
| 9 | Floor-of-the-mouth R | III R | − | IIa R | Early static oblique | − | 11 | NED |
| III L | − | |||||||
| 10 | Inferior alveolar process L | Ia L | − | III L | Late static oblique | n.s.r | 5 | NED |
| III L | − |
SLN sentinel lymph node, PA histopathological assessment, R right side, L left side, n.s.r. not surgically removed, + histopathologically positive, − histopathologically negative, NED no evidence of disease
Fig. 2A 77 year old patient (patient 3) with a cT2N0 primary tumor in the inferior alveolar process, located on the left side. Using the streamlined protocol, two SLNs were identified (level Ib left; level IIa left). Evaluation of early static LSG (anterior-oblique view) allowed discrimination between two hotspots in level IIa. Written informed consent for publishing these images was obtained from this patient. a Planar early dynamic LSG 10 min anterior view; one hotspot level Ib left (arrow). b SPECT-CT sagittal plane; one large hotspot level IIa (arrow). c SPECT-CT coronal plane; one large hotspot level IIa left (arrow). d SPECT-CT axial plane; injection site (i) and one large hotspot level IIa left (arrow). e Planar early static LSG anterior-oblique view; one additionally identified hotspot level IIa left (red circle). f Post-evaluation SPECT-CT reconstruction* sagittal plane; discrimination between two hotspots level IIa (arrows). g Post-evaluation SPECT-CT reconstruction* coronal plane; discrimination between two hotspots level IIa left (arrows). h Post-evaluation SPECT-CT reconstruction* axial plane; more cranially localized one additionally identified hotspot (red circle). *SPECT-CT reconstructions were made with ITK-SNAP (www.itksnap.org) [17]. LSG lymphoscintigraphy
Are all SLNs identified with the streamlined SLN imaging protocol?
| Yes ( | No ( | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Site of primary tumor | |||
| Tongue (%) | 43 (93.5%%) | 3 (6.5%) | |
| Floor-of-mouth (%) | 13 (92.9%%) | 1 (7.1%) | |
| Buccal mucosa (%) | 6 (75.0%) | 2 (25.0%) | |
| Inferior alveolar process (%) | 1 (25.0%) | 3 (75.0%) | |
| Retromolar area (%) | 4 (80.0%) | 1 (20.0%) | |
| Tumor size; mean (± SD) in mm | 19.07 ( | 18.67 ( | 0.873 |
| DOI; median (IQR) in mm | 7.00 (4.00) | 6.00 (3.00) | 0.478 |
| Midline involvement primary tumor | 0.343 | ||
| Yes (%) | 10 (100.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | |
| No (%) | 57 (85.1%) | 10 (14.9%) | |
| cT-stage | 0.773 | ||
| T1 (%) | 28 (90.3%) | 3 (9.7%) | |
| T2 (%) | 34 (85.0%) | 6 (15.0%) | |
| T3 (%) | 5 (83.3%) | 1 (16.7%) | |
| Imaging protocol | 0.638 | ||
| 1 day (%) | 6 (85.7%) | 1 (14.3%) | |
| 2 day (%) | 61 (87.1%) | 9 (12.9%) | |
| Radiotracer used | 0.495 | ||
| [99mTc] Tc-nanocolloid (%) | 49 (84.5%) | 9 (15.5%) | |
| [99mTc] Tc-tilmanocept (%) | 18 (94.7%) | 1 (5.3%) | |
| Dosage used; median in MBq (mCi) | 116.00 (3.14) | 121.50 (3.28) | 0.282 |
| Previous neck treatment | 0.088 | ||
| None (%) | 61 (89.7%) | 7 (10.3%) | |
| Neck dissection (%) | 2 (50.0%) | 2 (50.0%) | |
| Radiotherapy (%) | 2 (66.7%) | 1 (33.3%) | |
| Neck dissection and chemoradiation (%) | 2 (100.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | |
TNM-staging according to AJCC UICC 8th Edition [13, 14]
SD standard deviation, DOI depth-of-invasion, IQR interquartile range, MBq megabecquerel, mCi millicurie
*Bold if statistically significant
†Significance regards inferior alveolar process