| Literature DB >> 34655312 |
Alba Cristina Igual-Rouilleault1, Ignacio Soriano2, Paola Leonor Quan2, Alejandro Fernández-Montero2, Arlette Elizalde2, Luis Pina2.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This study was conducted in order to investigate COVID-19 vaccine influence on unilateral axillary lymph nodes, comparing nodal basal features with their characteristics after the first and second vaccination dose.Entities:
Keywords: COVID-19; Ultrasound; Unilateral axillary lymphadenopathy; mRNA vaccine
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34655312 PMCID: PMC8520081 DOI: 10.1007/s00330-021-08309-7
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Eur Radiol ISSN: 0938-7994 Impact factor: 7.034
Fig. 1Flow diagram of the study selection process
Details of sample
| Age (years; range) | 43.76 (20–65) |
|---|---|
| Women (percentage) | 72 (79.1%) |
| COVID-19 (percentage) | 26 (28.6%) |
Mean values of quantitative continuous variables in the three consecutive US examinations
Fig. 2Comparative US images from one volunteer between baseline and the first and second follow-ups showing a significant gradual increment of maximum diameter, cortex, Bedi’s classification, and Doppler scale degree
Mean values comparison of quantitative continuous variables between two patient groups: patients who had experienced infection by SARS-CoV2 and patients who had not (mean ± SD)
| Nodes (number) | |||
| Baseline (mean ± SD) | 3.04 ± 1.12 | 2.92 ± 1.04 | 0.626 |
| 1st follow-up (mean ± SD) | 4.65 ± 1.62 | 4.82 ± 1.68 | 0.643 |
| 2nd follow-up (mean ± SD) | 5.23 ± 1.86 | 6.60 ± 2.51 | 0.006 |
| Cortex (mm) | |||
| Baseline (mean ± SD) | 1.82 ± 1.33 | 1.48 ± 0.59 | 0.226 |
| 1st follow-up (mean ± SD) | 2.89 ± 2.14 | 3.99 ± 1.72 | < 0.001 |
| 2nd follow-up (mean ± SD) | 3.49 ± 1.76 | 4.98 ± 1.85 | 0.001 |
| Diameter (mm) | |||
| Baseline (mean ± SD) | 17.10 ± 1.37 | 15.33 ± 0.84 | 0.266 |
| 1st follow-up (mean ± SD) | 21.92 ± 1.40 | 20.82 ± 0.81 | 0.479 |
| 2nd follow-up (mean ± SD) | 23.20 ± 1.34 | 24.36 ± 0.82 | 0.462 |
Fig. 3Sample distribution and comparison per Bedi’s classification grades in the follow-up period (number of patients indicated for each grade)
Fig. 4Sample distribution and comparison per Doppler scale degrees in the three consecutive controls
Fig. 5Sample distribution of both groups and comparison per Bedi’s classification grades in the follow-up period
Fig. 6Sample distribution of both groups and comparison per Doppler scale signal in the follow-up period
Total number of US examinations performed by each radiologist in the second follow-up and cortical thickness mean value for its explorations. Non-statistically significant differences in ANOVA test (p value > 0.05)
| Radiologist 1 | Radiologist 2 | Radiologist 3 | Radiologist 4 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| US examinations 2nd follow-up (total number, %) | 31 (34%) | 15 (16.5%) | 33 (36.3%) | 12 (13.2%) |
| Cortex (mean, mm ± SD) | 4.54 ± 1.77 | 4.68 ± 1.85 | 4.36 ± 2.23 | 4.98 ± 5.08 |
| 0.81 | ||||