| Literature DB >> 34565434 |
Yasuo Kosugi1, Michimasa Suzuki2, Mitsuhisa Fujimaki3, Shinichi Ohba3, Fumihiko Matsumoto3, Yoichi Muramoto4, Terufumi Kawamoto4, Masaki Oshima4, Naoto Shikama4, Keisuke Sasai4.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the most appropriate radiologic criteria of metastatic retropharyngeal lymph nodes (RLNs) in patients with maxillary sinus cancer (MSC).Entities:
Keywords: Magnetic resonance image; Maxillary sinus cancer; Radiologic criteria; Retropharyngeal lymph node metastasis
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34565434 PMCID: PMC8474827 DOI: 10.1186/s13014-021-01917-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Radiat Oncol ISSN: 1748-717X Impact factor: 3.481
Patients’ characteristics
| Characteristics | Number of patients (%) |
|---|---|
| Age | |
| Median (range) | 67 (48–81) |
| Gender | |
| Male | 13 (81) |
| Female | 3 (19) |
| T stage | |
| T4a | 12 (75) |
| T4b | 4 (25) |
| N stage | |
| N0 | 6 (38) |
| N1 | 1 (6) |
| N2b | 9 (56) |
| Pretreatment diagnostic imaging | |
| MRI | 16 (100) |
| PET-CT | 9 (56) |
| Radiation thechnique | |
| 3DCRT | 9 (56) |
| IMRT | 7 (44) |
Location of RLNs on pre-treatment MRI
| Location on MRI | No. of RLNs at pretreatment MRI | No. of positive for metastatic RLNs | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ipsilateral | Contralateral | Ipsilateral | Contralateral | |
| Occipital bone | 3 | 1 | 3 | – |
| Body of C1 and C1/2 disk | 9 | 6 | 4 | – |
| Body of C2 and C2/3 disk | 6 | 8 | – | – |
| Body of C3 | – | 1 | – | – |
Axial diameter of metastatic or non-metastatic RLNs
| RLNs status | Minimal axial diameter | Maximal axial daiameter |
|---|---|---|
| Positive | 5.9 ± 0.5 | 8.8 ± 1.1 |
| Negative | 3.4 ± 0.1 | 6.5 ± 0.3 |
| p value | 0.0001 | 0.06 |
Fig. 1Metastatic RLN with findings of central necrosis. Arrowheads indicate RLNs with central necrosis
Fig. 2ROC curves of the maximal and minimal axial diameters. Red: minimal axial diameter; blue: maximal axial diameter. Metastatic RLNs could be diagnosed more accurately with the minimal axial diameter than with the maximal axial diameter (AUC 0.97 vs. 0.73, p = 0.05)
Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of several cut-offs per mm of different size criteria
| Diameter (mm) | Sensitivity(%) | Specificity | Accuracy |
|---|---|---|---|
| ( n = 7) | ( n = 28) | ( n = 35) | |
| Minimal axial diameter | |||
| ≥ 3 mm | 100 | 22.2 | 38.2 |
| ≥ 4 mm | 100 | 81.5 | 85.3 |
| ≥ 5 mm | 85.7 | 96.3 | 94.1 |
| ≥ 6 mm | 42.9 | 100 | 88.2 |
| ≥ 7 mm | 14.3 | 100 | 82.3 |
| Maxmal axial daiameter | |||
| ≥ 6 mm | 71.4 | 44.4 | 50 |
| ≥ 7 mm | 71.4 | 63 | 64.7 |
| ≥ 8 mm | 57.1 | 81.5 | 76.5 |
| ≥ 9 mm | 57.1 | 92.6 | 85.2 |
| ≥ 10 mm | 57.1 | 92.6 | 85.2 |
Reports of recurrence of RLNs
| Total number | Number of RLN recurrences (%) | Stage | Pathology | Treatment | Radiologic criteria on metastatic RLN | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kimura et al. 1998 | NR | 2 | T3N1M0, T3N0M0 | SCC, ME | S + IART, S + AC | NR |
| Le et al. 2000 | 97 | 2 [2] | T3 or T4 | NR | NR | NR |
| Umeda et al. 2005 | 22 | 1 [5]※ | T2N0M0 | SCC | S + IART | NR |
| Homma et al. 2014 | 98 | 2 [2] | T4N0M0 | SCC | S + RT | NR |
| Jeon et al. 2017 | 71 | 1 [1]※ | NR | NR | NR | NR |
※contralateral side recurrence
SCC; squamous cell carcinoma, ME; mucoepidermoid cancer, S; surgery, IART; intraarterial chemotheraoy and radiation therapy